Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

The Rule of ReciprocationFollow

#202 Dec 13 2012 at 5:44 PM Rating: Good
Timelordwho wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I hate to break tradition, here, but gbaji is right.

If you do not plan to tip then stay the @#%^ home.


Or takeout, that doesn't require a tip.
Post #200
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#203 Dec 13 2012 at 5:57 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I hate to break tradition, here, but gbaji is right.

If you do not plan to tip then stay the @#%^ home.


Or takeout, that doesn't require a tip.


Yup. The assumption that a tip will be required is one of the factors considered when making the decision to walk into the door of a restaurant in the first place. I think it's pretty obvious that if all other prices were the same, more people would walk into a restaurant if there was no tip expected than will if one is expected. Which is why the cost of the tip counts against the employer's business just as much as the cost printed on the menu does. To suggest that the tips don't really count as part of the total compensation for the wait staff because the customer is paying it directly to the waiter instead of paying a higher price on the bill itself is ridiculous. Money is money. Every dollar of tip cost is a dollar less the restaurant can charge for the meal if they expect to get the same number of people to pay for it.


I honestly didn't think I'd have to say this more than once. Seemed like this should be something everyone understands right off the bat. But apparently, that's not the case here.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#204 Dec 13 2012 at 6:04 PM Rating: Good
By "gbaji is right" I meant you should tip in the circumstances I defined above. I in no way advocate the other blather he's going on about because I wasn't paying attention to that.





I rated him up for the point, though, so I gotta go shower now.
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#205 Dec 13 2012 at 6:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
9,332 posts
It took 2.5 hours for my delivery chinese food to come... and more than 1 hour of that was after I first called wondering what was up and they said "the delivery man is on his way, he left 20 minutes ago and you're next."

Then when he arrived, his debit machine wasn't working. He then claimed it was because I didn't have any money, even though the machine clearly said "communication error"

I didn't give him a tip. Partially because we had to scrounge around for cash to pay because of the debit machine not working.

And even though he was a dipsh#t I still felt bad about it.

Edited, Dec 13th 2012 4:52pm by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#206 Dec 13 2012 at 8:07 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,706 posts
Hold on for a second here. Some of you know people who get take out just so they don't have to tip?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#207 Dec 13 2012 at 8:20 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
By "gbaji is right" I meant you should tip in the circumstances I defined above. I in no way advocate the other blather he's going on about because I wasn't paying attention to that.


You should increase the font size then. Smiley: grin

/ducks!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#208 Dec 13 2012 at 8:54 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Hold on for a second here. Some of you know people who get take out just so they don't have to tip?


I don't know about just not wanting to tip, and I wasn't thinking in terms of take out from a restaurant versus dining inside (cause that choice would usually be about time). I was thinking more in terms of a choice between the family heading out to a restaurant, or one person going and getting take out (not necessarily ordering, although that's an option as well). There's a significant price difference between the first and second options usually, even for similar food.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#209 Dec 13 2012 at 9:10 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Bijou wrote:
I guess somebody missed the point.

If I, personally, order food delivered or go to a sit-down-get-served restaurant I fully plan to be tipping. If you* don't, then you are a class-A douchebag.


Yes, you obviously missed the point. My argument is that because everyone plans on tipping, it isn't a deciding factor of rather or not we will order what we want. We order what we want based on the price of the meal, not based on us having to tip a waiter. Tipping a waiter is so mundane that we just do it like we do tax with no second thought about it. Once again, if paying for tax or a tip is an issue for you, then you are spending too much money and should eat at home. You obviously have not being paying attention. But that's ok, I'm used to the decontextualization of "Anything Alma says is wrong without the necessity of actually reading it". This just results in more entertainment when people dance around their words. Keep it up!Smiley: grin

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 5:10am by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#210 Dec 13 2012 at 9:19 PM Rating: Excellent
If my budget for a meal is $60 I will not go to a place where the list price of the food will be $60, then I can't afford to go to that restaurant and so I won't go there. I only have so much money, and so if my budget for eating out is $X a month, then the X includes the food costs, taxes and tip. It's not like the tip comes from imaginary money I don't have to budget for.

Similarly if I have $600 in my bank account, I can't go to best buy and purchase a $600 TV, as I won't be able to actually pay for it. Before you buy anything you factor in the total cost. That's how budgets work.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#211 Dec 13 2012 at 9:58 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I hate to break tradition, here, but gbaji is right.

If you do not plan to tip then stay the @#%^ home.


Or takeout, that doesn't require a tip.
Post #200


Almalieque wrote:
I assure you that no one goes to a nice not-so cheap restaurant and allows a tip to be a catalyst in what they are going to order. 15% is 15% is 15%. So unless you're against tipping a certain percentage, it's not a factor in what you spend in your meal. Tipping is extra, so if tipping is a problem then get take out, go to a fast food restaurant or even better yet, cook at home. I assure you that is the overall belief and your belief is the anomaly.



Gbaji wrote:
Yup. The assumption that a tip will be required is one of the factors considered when making the decision to walk into the door of a restaurant in the first place.


I'll get to the rest of your posts later. I'm just flabbergasted at this complete nonsense. This is 2012, not 1912. The vast majority of people pay with credit cards, debit cards and checking cards, not cash. So, if something as banal as tipping acts as a catalyst for your meal, THEN YOU ARE SPENDING TOO MUCH MONEY and you probably shouldn't be there! That's how budgeting works. Do you fret the tax that you pay on a dollar menu at a fast food restaurant? Not unless you're paying with nickels and dimes. Why?, you swipe your card or hand them a $5 bill. You don't know the exact tax, but you know it's less than $2 and that $5 will cover it.

Likewise with a restaurant, it's the same concept. You don't know the exact tax or tip because it doesn't matter. You have expectations of what to spend and you know the tax and tip are trivial adjuncts because they wont push you over your limit. If they do, then you simply have poor money management. Why would you max your card or break your budget on something like a dine-in restaurant as opposed to an investment, an emergency or something that lasts more than 2 hours of joy?

Gbaji wrote:
To suggest that the tips don't really count as part of the total compensation for the wait staff because the customer is paying it directly to the waiter instead of paying a higher price on the bill itself is ridiculous.


Given that a tip isn't mandatory or set at a certain price, it is quite the opposite. I would much rather tip an increase at my own choosing than let the employer decide. You are arguing the opposite, which completely contradicts two pages of everyone wanting more for less.

If a waiter forgets to bring my orders, get my orders wrong, gets an attitude or gives me the cold shoulder, I would not lament over him or her receiving a small tip.

Gbaji wrote:
Money is money.


Finally, something accurate.

Gbaji wrote:
Every dollar of tip cost is a dollar less the restaurant can charge for the meal if they expect to get the same number of people to pay for it.


Again with the fallacy. People order the food first, not tip the waiter. If your food sucks, then people wont order it, then your waiter wont receive tips, which means you will have to make up the difference. The key isn't tips. The key is selling more products. However, the food could be overpriced and sucky and I would still tip the waiter graciously if he or she deserves it.

Tipping is completely irrelevant to anyone who knows how to manage their money, because if it were an issue, they wouldn't be there in the first place
.

Gbaji wrote:
I honestly didn't think I'd have to say this more than once. Seemed like this should be something everyone understands right off the bat. But apparently, that's not the case here.


My words exactly. I didn't know you were either poor and/or unable to manage your money. PM me and I can teach you how you can go out to a restaurant and eat the food of your choosing without worrying about being able to pay for a tip or tax.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#212 Dec 14 2012 at 10:01 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,983 posts
Ok, what about Curbside? Do I need to tip the girl who walks out to the parking lot to hand me my food? I mean, it's a bit more effort than standing in a booth, tossing food out the window...
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#213 Dec 14 2012 at 10:03 AM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I hate to break tradition, here, but gbaji is right.

If you do not plan to tip then stay the @#%^ home.


Or takeout, that doesn't require a tip.

OK here's a question. Carside to go, a la Applebees. Tip or not?

I typically add a couple dollars for the trip out to the car, but I'm not sure if that's warranted, or if it's just me tipping too much again.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#214 Dec 14 2012 at 10:07 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,065 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I hate to break tradition, here, but gbaji is right.

If you do not plan to tip then stay the @#%^ home.


Or takeout, that doesn't require a tip.

OK here's a question. Carside to go, a la Applebees. Tip or not?

I typically add a couple dollars for the trip out to the car, but I'm not sure if that's warranted, or if it's just me tipping too much again.

Take out is tricky.

If an eatery is designed for take out, their staff is most likely paid a non-tip earners wage. So tipping is not really necessary.

But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#215 Dec 14 2012 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
******
44,001 posts
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.
The people at Wendy's do the same thing. I tip the waiting staff for being waiting staff. Checking on drinks and whatever unlimited item (bread, soup, salad, etc) that may require filling up, accurate orders and checking to make sure that I'm generally enjoying myself and such.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#216 Dec 14 2012 at 10:35 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,983 posts
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.

I wouldn't call that a considerable amount of time. Now, if I planned on sitting in my car for the next half-hour eating, and expected her to come out and check on me, then that would be something different.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#217 Dec 14 2012 at 10:37 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,065 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.
The people at Wendy's do the same thing. .....
Exactly. The people at Wendy's are not getting paid a server wage and not reliant on tips.

The server at Applebees probably is.


____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#218 Dec 14 2012 at 10:42 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,065 posts
Debalic wrote:
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.

I wouldn't call that a considerable amount of time. Now, if I planned on sitting in my car for the next half-hour eating, and expected her to come out and check on me, then that would be something different.
See that's just the thing.

Man, packing up a lobster dinner and a prime rib dinner was a huge pita. You had to draw a little cup of au jus and a little cup of butter and you had to pack them a salad and little cups of dressing, and potatoes and butter and sour cream, etc etc etc. It was the very worst to have to pack up a meal to go in the middle of busy dinner rush.

Really it depends on the establishment. More and more dinner places are providing and pushing 'to-go' service and are better equipped to deal with it. I'm guessing that the little curb side entry for to-go food is staffed by someone who is not being paid a servers wage.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#219 Dec 14 2012 at 12:05 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,706 posts
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.
The people at Wendy's do the same thing. .....
Exactly. The people at Wendy's are not getting paid a server wage and not reliant on tips.

The server at Applebees probably is.


Possibly. If they have an area specifically designed for take-out, it may be manned by someone such as a host(ess) who likely doesn't qualify for the reduced server wage.

Edit: or nvm, you commented on it in the nest post...


Edited, Dec 14th 2012 2:05pm by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#220 Dec 14 2012 at 12:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
Pfft. I tip at the Chinese food place near me when I pickup, and now I they give me extra eggrolls and almond cookies when I go there, and I only tip the coins from my change from paying, plus a dollar.

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 1:32pm by Spoonless
____________________________
Banh
#221 Dec 14 2012 at 1:10 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.
The people at Wendy's do the same thing. .....
Exactly. The people at Wendy's are not getting paid a server wage and not reliant on tips.

The server at Applebees probably is.


Possibly. If they have an area specifically designed for take-out, it may be manned by someone such as a host(ess) who likely doesn't qualify for the reduced server wage.

Edit: or nvm, you commented on it in the nest post...


Edited, Dec 14th 2012 2:05pm by Uglysasquatch



Meh, you guys get bogged down in the details entirely too much. I didn't ask about "what if"s. If you go to a sit down restaurant like Applebees that offers carside delivery, do you tip the person who brings the food to your car, yes or no?
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#222 Dec 14 2012 at 1:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,896 posts
I wouldn't get take out from Applebees.

Didn't even know they did that until reading this thread... Smiley: rolleyes

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 11:13am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#223 Dec 14 2012 at 1:15 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
I wouldn't get take out from Applebees.


But if you did use the carside service, would you tip or not? For a bunch of reasonably intelligent people, simple questions seem to elude you folks sooooo much. I don't get it.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#224 Dec 14 2012 at 1:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
I wouldn't get take out from Applebees.


But if you did use the carside service, would you tip or not? For a bunch of reasonably intelligent people, simple questions seem to elude you folks sooooo much. I don't get it.
I would probably tip them the coins from my change, plus a dollar.
____________________________
Banh
#225 Dec 14 2012 at 1:19 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,065 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Elinda wrote:
But if you go to the Applebees and some server has to box, bag, add napkins/condiments/plasticware, they're putting a considerable amount of time into your meal and probably expect a tip.
The people at Wendy's do the same thing. .....
Exactly. The people at Wendy's are not getting paid a server wage and not reliant on tips.

The server at Applebees probably is.


Possibly. If they have an area specifically designed for take-out, it may be manned by someone such as a host(ess) who likely doesn't qualify for the reduced server wage.

Edit: or nvm, you commented on it in the nest post...


Edited, Dec 14th 2012 2:05pm by Uglysasquatch



Meh, you guys get bogged down in the details entirely too much. I didn't ask about "what if"s. If you go to a sit down restaurant like Applebees that offers carside delivery, do you tip the person who brings the food to your car, yes or no?
I've never experienced this, but if I did, I would probably tip them but only like 10% - purely out of uncertainty. I'd rather tip when not necessary than not tip when necessary.

Do they deliver your food on roller skates?


____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#226 Dec 14 2012 at 1:22 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,065 posts
Spoonless wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
I wouldn't get take out from Applebees.


But if you did use the carside service, would you tip or not? For a bunch of reasonably intelligent people, simple questions seem to elude you folks sooooo much. I don't get it.
I would probably tip them the coins from my change, plus a dollar.

I bet it never gets you an extra egg roll or fortune cookie.

Edit - we all know what Brownduck is having for dinner. I want my babyback baby back baby back.....

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 8:24pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#227 Dec 14 2012 at 1:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,896 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
I wouldn't get take out from Applebees.


But if you did use the carside service, would you tip or not? For a bunch of reasonably intelligent people, simple questions seem to elude you folks sooooo much. I don't get it.

I have no idea. But it's not something I've done before, or are likely to do anytime in the near future, so it's kind of hard to give an honest answer.

I'll just say I probably wouldn't tip, just because I likely wouldn't know any better.

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 11:34am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#228 Dec 14 2012 at 1:38 PM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
Elinda wrote:
Spoonless wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
I wouldn't get take out from Applebees.


But if you did use the carside service, would you tip or not? For a bunch of reasonably intelligent people, simple questions seem to elude you folks sooooo much. I don't get it.
I would probably tip them the coins from my change, plus a dollar.

I bet it never gets you an extra egg roll or fortune cookie.
Probably not, but they're allowing me to be a lazy **** and stay in my car. I don't tip at a drive-thru because the workers don't actually have to come outside and bring my food.

What's the point of Carside to Go anyway? Are you meant to park there and then order, and hang out in your car while they make it? I mean, I've ordered take out from Applebee's before, but I phone it in, and then go pick it up. I just can't really see a situation where I'd make them bring it out to me.
____________________________
Banh
#229 Dec 14 2012 at 3:52 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Gbaji wrote:

I'm not an anomaly. Anyone who doesn't take into account the total cost of dining out, including tax and tip is an idiot.


Anyone who dines at a place where the tax and a tip will break their budget is an idiot.

Gbaji wrote:


Sigh. You were sooo close. If your dinner budget is $30, that's how much you're aiming to spend including tax and tip.


My mistake. That was my intent to make it less than 30. Change the $13.00 to $12.50 and answer the question.

Gbaji wrote:
Whether you think in terms of "I can afford to spend $30 total including tax and tip" or "I can afford to spend $30 on dinner plus the tax and tip that will involve" really doesn't matter. There will always be some comparison made by the consumer between the cost of the meal and the quality of the meal.


The bold and underline is 100% accurate, so how can you not see the contradiction in your overall point? People care about the value of what they are purchasing. They are not going to pay more for an item just because you (the employer) has to make up the difference of your waitstaff. They will simply not pay for it and/or go somewhere else.

Gbjai wrote:

What you're missing is that if my hypothetical limit is X, then anything which pushes the price over X will mean I wont by the meal. If increasing the servers salary means that my total cost increases over X, then I wont buy the meal. I'm not sure what about this is causing such a mental block.


The mental block is why would you intentionally go to a place where the tax and tip will push the price over your hypothetical limit?

Would you go to a Lexus dealership with a $10,000 budget on a new car? So, why are you going to a restaurant where you can't comfortably buy what you want and not worry about tax and/or a tip? It's the same concept. If you're in that scenario, then as I said, you are spending too much money.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#230 Dec 14 2012 at 4:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
9,332 posts
I actually tip often for take out, especially any place I go to frequently. Actually, I almost always tip on takeout. I know most people don't, but it's a habit. I tip less most of the time though, like a flat dollar or two rather than a percentage.

We have a dining room here at work and I only really ever get take out, but I almost always tip. They know more than anyone else in this place. I'd rather stay on their good side. Besides, sometimes, when I've gotten really busy and forgotten to pick up my food, they have hunted me down to give it to me.

____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#231 Dec 14 2012 at 4:32 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:

I'm not an anomaly. Anyone who doesn't take into account the total cost of dining out, including tax and tip is an idiot.


Anyone who dines at a place where the tax and a tip will break their budget is an idiot.


And anyone who doesn't budget based on value rather than how much they can afford will never be able to afford much.

Look. I know this is probably a waste of my time, but every single dollar counts. It's measured relative to what you get (or expect to get). This is why different items cost different amounts of money on the menu. Because people don't just pay whatever amount they can afford. They pay what they think the meal is worth to them. So you might decide between two dishes because one of them is $3 less than the other, but both seem equally appealing. If no one cared about the few bucks in tax and tip, then no one would care about a few bucks difference in the price of items on the menu. But they do. If they didn't, then the mac and cheese would cost just as much as the lobster.



Quote:
The mental block is why would you intentionally go to a place where the tax and tip will push the price over your hypothetical limit?

Would you go to a Lexus dealership with a $10,000 budget on a new car? So, why are you going to a restaurant where you can't comfortably buy what you want and not worry about tax and/or a tip? It's the same concept. If you're in that scenario, then as I said, you are spending too much money.


You're completely missing the point. It's not about "budget". It's about value. If I walk into a restaurant with $5k in my pocket, it doesn't mean that I don't care about the relative prices of the items on the menu. If I don't think that the steak at this restaurant is worth the $40 they're asking, I'm not going to order it. Similarly, if I think a restaurant as a whole is overpriced for the meal and service and decor, I wont go there. And every single dollar involved in that calculation is involved in that calculation. Obviously, since tax and tip are relative to menu price, which number I'm using directly doesn't matter. But it does matter if I'm considering whether I want to eat out at a restaurant in the first place.


Even if I can afford any Lexus on the lot doesn't mean that I think they're all worth the cost being asked. Only a fool fails to take relative value versus cost into account.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#232 Dec 14 2012 at 4:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,706 posts
I tip take out but always am unsure if I just ****** away money when doing so.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#233 Dec 14 2012 at 4:46 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,706 posts
Quote:
Anyone who dines at a place where the tax and a tip will break their budget is an idiot.
Exactly, which is why you should consider the total cost before dinning out, so you don't become an idiot.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#234 Dec 14 2012 at 5:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
As an ex-server/bartender, I don't feel the need to tip the server that brings my food out to the car. A., the server is most likely still waiting tables and this is considered part of her section or duties, just like running food to tables that aren't hers are; or 2., this is the server's designated job for her shift and she's probably making at least minimum wage for the shift.
#235 Dec 14 2012 at 6:39 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Gbaji wrote:
.This has got to be one of the more moronic things you've posted. Can't we assume that the business is doing everything it can to maximize profits already?


You do realize that you just contradicted yourself right? Of course the business did everything to maximize their profits at the time. But when that time changes, i.e. more/less sales or (I don't know) the necessity to pay your waitstaff more, the variables that you used to maximize your profits have changed. As a result, your application of those variables should also change. Hence the reason why you proposed raising the prices of your goods. That was one of the choices that I mentioned. Yet, some how it's the most moronic thing I've ever written? The very same suggestion that you posted? haha..

Anyway, once the variables change, you have several ways to make up the potential loss of money. Raising product prices is only of the options not necessary to make up any lost money.

Gbaji wrote:
So none of those options work either because the business will already be doing them or it wont want to do them.


How so? Please explain how those options wont work? Especially when every "mom & pop" shop do these very same things when they expand?

Hint: Think about Papa John's and their selling point.

Gbaji wrote:
The business will only pay its servers more *if* they have to in order to maintain a sufficient quality of service for their customers.


False, the business will only pay its servers more *if* they have to in order to maintain their servers.

Gbaji wrote:
Unless servers are quitting and going to your competition because you don't pay them enough, you have no reason to pay them more.


True, but even then, as long as you have a rotation of servers, there is no need to increase the pay either. Your competition isn't "limitless". Sooner or later, your competition will stop hiring.

Gbaji wrote:
If they're good enough that you have to do so to avoid losing sales because of poor service then you *will* pay the wait staff more.


Short of staff != poor service.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#236 Dec 14 2012 at 6:54 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Quote:
Anyone who dines at a place where the tax and a tip will break their budget is an idiot.
Exactly, which is why you should consider the total cost before dinning out, so you don't become an idiot.


1. If you have to bust out a calculator to determine if rather or not paying tax or a tip at McDonalds or Chilli's is within your budget, you my friend are an idiot with no concept of the value and/or spending of money.

2. Unless you're carrying cash, which you probably aren't at anything better than a fast food joint, you will have extra money on you. So, if 22% ( %15 tip and %7 tax) above your spending budget makes any significant impact on your overall financial situation, then once again, you are an idiot.

For example, if your budget were $100, you would be spending $22 in tax and in tips. If $22 is a big deal to you and to your budget, then you should have taken that $22 to Applebees or Burger King and not spend $100 on food. Which, again, would make you an idiot.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#237 Dec 14 2012 at 7:13 PM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
Almalieque wrote:
For example, if your budget were $100, you would be spending $22 in tax and in tips. If $22 is a big deal to you and to your budget, then you should have taken that $22 to Applebees or Burger King and not spend $100 on food. Which, again, would make you an idiot.
Actually, if your overall meal budget is $100, you should understand that $81.97 is your meal price budget working within that constraint. Or you could ballpark it at 20% of your budget for tax and tip, which shouldn't take a calculator to determine. This would give you $80 for your meal price budget, which leaves enough room for 15% tip and 7% tax.

You should be including your tax and tips within your budget.

Also, plenty of people still pay cash for many things greater than the total cost of a fast food menu.

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 8:15pm by Spoonless
____________________________
Banh
#238 Dec 14 2012 at 7:15 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
.This has got to be one of the more moronic things you've posted. Can't we assume that the business is doing everything it can to maximize profits already?


You do realize that you just contradicted yourself right?


Since I don't remember what it was you said that prompted my response, then no I don't realize that. Smiley: tongue


Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
So none of those options work either because the business will already be doing them or it wont want to do them.


How so? Please explain how those options wont work? Especially when every "mom & pop" shop do these very same things when they expand?

Hint: Think about Papa John's and their selling point.


Again. Only vaguely remember the options (perhaps if you were going to make an entire post about how I was wrong to disagree with something you said, you could have included the statement in question? Just a suggestion). I'm not sure what Papa John's selling point is. Great pizza at a great price? Something like that. You get that the point is to maximize profits for the company though, right? I mean, they wouldn't make "great pizza" if they didn't think they'd make more money doing so then making "crappy pizza". So coming in and saying that they could make up for paying their servers more by making better pizza is kinda moronic (ok, maybe I am starting to remember).

Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
The business will only pay its servers more *if* they have to in order to maintain a sufficient quality of service for their customers.


False, the business will only pay its servers more *if* they have to in order to maintain their servers.


Uh... Okay. Maybe I have to hold your hand through each step of the logic. The reason they "maintain their servers" is so that they can "maintain sufficient quality of service for their customers". If they had no requirement to do the latter, then they could just fire waitstaff at will and hire the next random person walking down the street to take over the position. Get it? If my customers don't care about the quality of service, then there's no reason to pay more for my servers.

How did you not get that?

Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
Unless servers are quitting and going to your competition because you don't pay them enough, you have no reason to pay them more.


True, but even then, as long as you have a rotation of servers, there is no need to increase the pay either. Your competition isn't "limitless". Sooner or later, your competition will stop hiring.


Ok. But we're back to the "you get the random guy who walked in off the street" problem. At the risk of being obvious (too late!) if there are more random people walking in my door to be hired as servers than my competition will take from me *and* they can all do just as good a job as the guy who quit to go work for my competition, then I have no reason to pay my servers more either. Cause there's another guy at the door willing to do the same job just as well. My servers leaving to work for my competition only hurts me if my servers are better than someone I can get off the street to replace them and my business will suffer because of it.

If those conditions are not true, then we're back to me having no reason to raise their wages. I know this sounds cruel or whatever, but if your labor can be replaced trivially by anyone walking down the street at a rate sufficient to ensure work coverage, then you can't demand a higher wage. It's like trying to charge $100 for a rock anyone could pick up for free off the ground. No one's going to pay that.

Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
If they're good enough that you have to do so to avoid losing sales because of poor service then you *will* pay the wait staff more.


Short of staff != poor service.


True. But my comment was specifically about the skill level of the server though. If I refuse to pay my skilled servers as much as my competition, they will leave to work for my competition. I will then have to hire a less skilled server willing to work for the lower wage. Thus my service will be poor compared to my competitor. Thus, people will not be as willing to pay as much for the meals I'm serving. Thus I will lose money and thus I will have an incentive to increase the wages for my servers.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Employers will tend to pay their employees what they think their employee's labor is worth to them. Employees will tend to only work for employers who pay them what they (the employee in this case) think their labor is worth. If they are overpaid, the employer will lose money because they're paying more than the labor is gaining them. If they are underpaid, the employer will lose money because the skilled employee will leave to work for someone willing to pay what their labor is actually worth.

Obviously, this is complicated because it's all based on what the employee thinks his labor is worth versus what the employer thinks it is. Either or both of them could be wrong. But the more accurate each side is in assessing that value, the better off they are in the market respectively. So there really is an incentive for them to be relatively accurate. It's not a perfect method to determine the value of labor, but it's better than any other method. At the end of the day, your argument seems to rest entirely on an assumption that these market forces don't work and will somehow always conspire to ***** over the employee while benefiting the employer. The reality though is that the employer is just as likely to overpay an employee as underpay them. The system works. And frankly, as I've asked several times, what alternative do you suggest?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#239 Dec 14 2012 at 7:16 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,706 posts
Spoonless wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
For example, if your budget were $100, you would be spending $22 in tax and in tips. If $22 is a big deal to you and to your budget, then you should have taken that $22 to Applebees or Burger King and not spend $100 on food. Which, again, would make you an idiot.
Actually, if your overall meal budget is $100, you should understand that $81.97 is your meal price budget working within that constraint. Or you could ballpark it at 20% of your budget for tax and tip, which shouldn't take a calculator to determine. This would give you $80 for your meal price budget, which leaves enough room for 15% tip and 7% tax.

You should be including your tax and tips within your budget.

Also, plenty of people still pay cash for many things greater than the total cost of a fast food menu.

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 8:15pm by Spoonless
You've failed me. You're supposed to remind me not to talk to him, not talk to him yourself.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#240 Dec 14 2012 at 7:18 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Spoonless wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
For example, if your budget were $100, you would be spending $22 in tax and in tips. If $22 is a big deal to you and to your budget, then you should have taken that $22 to Applebees or Burger King and not spend $100 on food. Which, again, would make you an idiot.
Actually, if your overall meal budget is $100, you should understand that $81.97 is your meal price budget working within that constraint. Or you could ballpark it at 20% of your budget for tax and tip, which shouldn't take a calculator to determine. This would give you $80 for your meal price budget, which leaves enough room for 15% tip and 7% tax.

You should be including your tax and tips within your budget.

Also, plenty of people still pay cash for many things greater than the total cost of a fast food menu.


That's crazy talk man! You should either be willing to pay your budget plus whatever other tax and tip costs there are, or just go home and cry like a little baby or something. Cause no one can actually do something like ballpark the total cost of a night out or anything and plan out what they want to do based on that. There's no middle ground between "willing to spend any amount of money" and "not willing to spend any money at all".

You should know better!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#241 Dec 14 2012 at 7:25 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Spoonless wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
For example, if your budget were $100, you would be spending $22 in tax and in tips. If $22 is a big deal to you and to your budget, then you should have taken that $22 to Applebees or Burger King and not spend $100 on food. Which, again, would make you an idiot.
Actually, if your overall meal budget is $100, you should understand that $81.97 is your meal price budget working within that constraint. Or you could ballpark it at 20% of your budget for tax and tip, which shouldn't take a calculator to determine. This would give you $80 for your meal price budget, which leaves enough room for 15% tip and 7% tax.

You should be including your tax and tips within your budget.

Also, plenty of people still pay cash for many things greater than the total cost of a fast food menu.

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 8:15pm by Spoonless


The point was that if your budget were $100 and you did NOT account for tips and tax, you would only be paying $22. If $22 is a lot of money to spend on tax and tips, then you wouldn't be spending $100 on food in the first place.

If you go to your favorite restaurant with the intent of buying your favorite dish that you always buy and the price went up. You had no intention on spending above the price that you always paid for it. However, you still think it's a good value and you have the money to pay for it, do you still buy the dish or do you buy something cheaper?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#242 Dec 14 2012 at 7:28 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
gbaji wrote:
Spoonless wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
For example, if your budget were $100, you would be spending $22 in tax and in tips. If $22 is a big deal to you and to your budget, then you should have taken that $22 to Applebees or Burger King and not spend $100 on food. Which, again, would make you an idiot.
Actually, if your overall meal budget is $100, you should understand that $81.97 is your meal price budget working within that constraint. Or you could ballpark it at 20% of your budget for tax and tip, which shouldn't take a calculator to determine. This would give you $80 for your meal price budget, which leaves enough room for 15% tip and 7% tax.

You should be including your tax and tips within your budget.

Also, plenty of people still pay cash for many things greater than the total cost of a fast food menu.


That's crazy talk man! You should either be willing to pay your budget plus whatever other tax and tip costs there are, or just go home and cry like a little baby or something. Cause no one can actually do something like ballpark the total cost of a night out or anything and plan out what they want to do based on that. There's no middle ground between "willing to spend any amount of money" and "not willing to spend any money at all".

You should know better!


"Ball-parking" a price is EXACTLY what I've been saying the whole entire time.

Thank you for finally admitting that you're wrong!

I know that I can go in to Wendy's with $20 and get any meal that I wont. Therefore, as long as the meal is a good value, I'm not concerned about tax because I know it will be less than $20. No need to calculate the tax.

That concept applies to EVERY restaurant.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#243 Dec 14 2012 at 7:40 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Almalieque wrote:
The point was that if your budget were $100 and you did NOT account for tips and tax, you would only be paying $22. If $22 is a lot of money to spend on tax and tips, then you wouldn't be spending $100 on food in the first place.


No. You'd be paying $122. We're not talking about a comparison between paying $100 and paying $22. It's between paying $100 and $122 (this is called "addition"). Can you get that someone might decide that a given meal is worth $100, but not $122? So when making a decision about whether to go to that restaurant, you might decide that $122 is too much and go somewhere else where it's a little bit less expensive (like the $80 meal with 7% tax and 15% tip since that will come out to the desired budget of $100).

Quote:
If you go to your favorite restaurant with the intent of buying your favorite dish that you always buy and the price went up. You had no intention on spending above the price that you always paid for it. However, you still think it's a good value and you have the money to pay for it, do you still buy the dish or do you buy something cheaper?


Since your question includes the given that I think it's still a good value, then I'd buy it. But you've skipped the part where I decide if it's a good value. The difference of a few bucks might shift a given dish from something I'm willing to pay that much for to something I'm not willing to pay that much for. And that assessment has very little to do with what I can physically afford to pay, but whether the value of that dish is worth it relative to other things I could buy with the same amount of money.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#244 Dec 14 2012 at 7:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
This might not be the most stupid discussion you guys have ever had, but ******* it's close.
#245 Dec 14 2012 at 7:48 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Almalieque wrote:
"Ball-parking" a price is EXACTLY what I've been saying the whole entire time.


No. You've been insisting that when people ball park their costs, they should not include tax and tip. That's the position every single person in this thread had said is wrong.

Quote:
I know that I can go in to Wendy's with $20 and get any meal that I wont. Therefore, as long as the meal is a good value, I'm not concerned about tax because I know it will be less than $20. No need to calculate the tax.


But what if you go in with $10? Or $5? We can sit here and contrive dollar amounts in people's pockets all day long, but I'm not sure what that accomplishes. Consumers understand that they're going to have to pay taxes on their food at Wendy's, so they account for that when deciding what to buy. It's part of that ballpark estimate.

Quote:
That concept applies to EVERY restaurant.


Um... Except that some restaurants charge a tip and some don't. So if I walk into Wendy's I know that the actual dollars I have to pay is the amount of the meal plus tax. I know when I walk into Denny's that the dollars I'll have to pay is the amount of the meal, plus tax, plus tip. One might absolutely make a decision whether to eat at Wendy's or at Denny's based on that difference.

Which is why it's absurd to argue that no one takes the tip into account. They take it into account when deciding to eat somewhere with waitstaff that they'll be expected to tip. It costs close to the same amount to eat at Denny's versus Wendy's. But one of them I'll get served at my table, but be expected to tip. At the other, I will get no service, but have to pay no tip. You really don't think that might factor into someone's decision? Of course it will.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#246 Dec 14 2012 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
****
7,810 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm not sure what Papa John's selling point is. Great pizza at a great price? Something like that.

"Papa" John Schnatter wrote:
Better Ingredients, Better Pizza. Papa Johns
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#247 Dec 14 2012 at 8:33 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
gbaji wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:

I'm not an anomaly. Anyone who doesn't take into account the total cost of dining out, including tax and tip is an idiot.


Anyone who dines at a place where the tax and a tip will break their budget is an idiot.


And anyone who doesn't budget based on value rather than how much they can afford will never be able to afford much.

Look. I know this is probably a waste of my time, but every single dollar counts. It's measured relative to what you get (or expect to get). This is why different items cost different amounts of money on the menu. Because people don't just pay whatever amount they can afford. They pay what they think the meal is worth to them. So you might decide between two dishes because one of them is $3 less than the other, but both seem equally appealing. If no one cared about the few bucks in tax and tip, then no one would care about a few bucks difference in the price of items on the menu. But they do. If they didn't, then the mac and cheese would cost just as much as the lobster.



Quote:
The mental block is why would you intentionally go to a place where the tax and tip will push the price over your hypothetical limit?

Would you go to a Lexus dealership with a $10,000 budget on a new car? So, why are you going to a restaurant where you can't comfortably buy what you want and not worry about tax and/or a tip? It's the same concept. If you're in that scenario, then as I said, you are spending too much money.


You're completely missing the point. It's not about "budget". It's about value. If I walk into a restaurant with $5k in my pocket, it doesn't mean that I don't care about the relative prices of the items on the menu. If I don't think that the steak at this restaurant is worth the $40 they're asking, I'm not going to order it. Similarly, if I think a restaurant as a whole is overpriced for the meal and service and decor, I wont go there. And every single dollar involved in that calculation is involved in that calculation. Obviously, since tax and tip are relative to menu price, which number I'm using directly doesn't matter. But it does matter if I'm considering whether I want to eat out at a restaurant in the first place.


Even if I can afford any Lexus on the lot doesn't mean that I think they're all worth the cost being asked. Only a fool fails to take relative value versus cost into account.



Almalieque The Most Awesome wrote:
Gbaji The convenient post skipper wrote:

Whether you think in terms of "I can afford to spend $30 total including tax and tip" or "I can afford to spend $30 on dinner plus the tax and tip that will involve" really doesn't matter. There will always be some comparison made by the consumer between the cost of the meal and the quality of the meal.


The bold and underline is 100% accurate, so how can you not see the contradiction in your overall point? People care about the value of what they are purchasing. They are not going to pay more for an item just because you (the employer) has to make up the difference of your waitstaff. They will simply not pay for it and/or go somewhere else.


I see the disconnect. Answer this response that you "conveniently" skipped and we can possibly make some ground to an understanding.


____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#248 Dec 14 2012 at 9:04 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Almalieque The Most Awesome wrote:
Gbaji The convenient post skipper wrote:

Whether you think in terms of "I can afford to spend $30 total including tax and tip" or "I can afford to spend $30 on dinner plus the tax and tip that will involve" really doesn't matter. There will always be some comparison made by the consumer between the cost of the meal and the quality of the meal.


The bold and underline is 100% accurate, so how can you not see the contradiction in your overall point? People care about the value of what they are purchasing. They are not going to pay more for an item just because you (the employer) has to make up the difference of your waitstaff. They will simply not pay for it and/or go somewhere else.


I see the disconnect. Answer this response that you "conveniently" skipped and we can possibly make some ground to an understanding.


I skipped it because it's not clear to me what you are asking (technically, you didn't ask a question anyway). You agree with me that the consumer is going to make a comparison between the cost of the meal and the quality of the meal. Great. But then you say "They are not going to pay more for an item just because you (the employer) has to make up the difference of your waitstaff. They will simply not pay for it and/or go somewhere else.".

I honestly don't know what you are trying to say here. I tend to skip posts like this from you because I don't want to play 20 questions trying to figure out what you mean. I don't know what you mean by "you (the employer) has to make up the difference of your waitstaff". And honestly, I don't think it matters. We agree that the customer wont pay more for the meal than what he thinks it's worth. It doesn't matter what caused the meal to cost more than what the customer thinks it's worth, so what's the point of this statement?

If the cost of the meal is higher because the employer has to pay his waitstaff a higher base wage, and that increase is sufficient to make the customer not buy the meal, then that affected that decision. But that's what I've been saying all along, so ... what?

'
The main point I think we've been disagreeing on all along was that I said that it doesn't matter what makes up that total cost. Let's imagine these conditions. In all cases assume the quality of the meal is identical and the limit the customer is willing to pay is $32.

1. Waitstaff pay is based on a lower minimum wage and tips are expected. Meal costs $25, plus $2 tax, plus $4 tip. Total cost $31. Customer will buy the meal.

2. Waitstaff pay is based on a normal minimum wage and there are no tips. Because of increase cost for wages, meal now costs $29, plus $2.40 tax. Total cost $31.40. Customer will buy the meal.

3. Waitstaff pay is based on normal minimum wage and they're paid tips. Meal costs $29, plus $2.40 tax, plus $5 tip. Total cost is $36.40. Customer will not buy the meal.


This is what I was trying to get you to understand from the beginning. The total cost affects the decision the customer makes, which in turn affects the employers profits (which in turn affects his employees pay, but lets not get ahead of ourselves). You made a claim very early in this thread that whether waitstaff receive tips or not does not in any way affect the profits of the employer, so it was somehow unfair for the employer to pay them a lower base wage because they were receiving tips. But case #3 clearly shows that this is not true. The total cost only stays below what the customer is willing to pay if the employer either pays a full standard wage *or* the waitstaff gets tips, but not if both are in effect.

It does "cost" the employer if the waitstaff receive tips because it affects the cost that the customer is actually paying for the meal, which in turn affects that decision. Every dollar that the tip increases the bill is a dollar that the employer has to reduce the base cost of the meal by in order to get the same number of customers to buy it. This is really basic supply and demand stuff. The sticking point is your insistence that tips somehow don't count when customers decide if something is worth the cost.

Once you get past that little silliness, it's pretty obvious that tips affect the employer just as though he'd paid them to the waitstaff out of his own pocket. Each dollar of tip is a dollar that he can't charge for the meal. I don't know how many different ways I can express this same very basic economic concept so you can understand it. I think that everyone else gets it, but not you. I'm not sure if you honestly just don't get this, or if you're being deliberately obtuse, but please stop and think about this before responding. Think the whole thing through. Don't jump to an assumption about what I'm saying and then go off on a tangent. Look at those three cases. See how they prove what I've been saying all along.


I can only lead a horse to water. It has to take the drink itself.

Edited, Dec 14th 2012 7:07pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#249 Dec 14 2012 at 9:05 PM Rating: Good
I'm still a bit astounded by the concept that someone would order take out to avoid paying a server a tip. When I order take out, I do it so I don't have to sit down in a restaurant and wait for my food. I call it in, wait the time the person on the phone said it would take, then go and pick up my food. Mostly, I order take out because I'm feeling lazy. I don't do it to save money, and I think anybody who does is a jack ***.

I actually agree with Alma as far as the minimum wage thing goes. Maybe it's because I'm from Oregon and we pay our servers minimum wage out here, but I think it's stupid and cheap of restaurants to get away with paying their servers less than minimum wage because obviously they'll make it up in tips. And? It's a minimum wage for a reason. Tipping is optional. You can't call it a minimum wage and have there be loopholes.

My boyfriend was a server for two years and he has plenty of stories of people being cheap skates. There was one time where one of his coworkers had a near $100 table, and they tipped her just enough to make it the 100 dollars. The manager actually came over to talk to them and asked if there was anything she had done wrong, if they were happy with their service from her. The man who was paying the bill was rather astounded that they'd even ask that and said she was great. Apparently he was either clueless or a cheapskate, one of the two. Maybe both.

I personally try to tip 20%. Sometimes i might do 15 depending on my mood and the pocket book, but I don't go out much. It's what my bf calls server karma. Don't know at this rate if he'll ever be a server again, but just in case.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#250 Dec 14 2012 at 9:34 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
I'm still a bit astounded by the concept that someone would order take out to avoid paying a server a tip.


I don't believe anyone actually said that though. I brought it up only as an illustration of the different cost models when purchasing food. I also mentioned going to the grocery store, but you'd never assume I meant that you buy food in a grocery store to avoid paying a tip at a restaurant, would you? There are a host of reasons one might choose to obtain food one way or another. Cost is one factor. Convenience another. Time another.

Quote:
I actually agree with Alma as far as the minimum wage thing goes. Maybe it's because I'm from Oregon and we pay our servers minimum wage out here, but I think it's stupid and cheap of restaurants to get away with paying their servers less than minimum wage because obviously they'll make it up in tips. And? It's a minimum wage for a reason. Tipping is optional. You can't call it a minimum wage and have there be loopholes.


Most states (all?) require that the employer prove that the average hourly wage after tips is still higher than the state minimum wage in order for the lower minimum wage to be legal. So the whole "but that's the minimum, so they should always be paid the minimum!" isn't really a good argument. Now, if you just want to argue that waiting tables is tough work and they should be paid more, then that's a fine argument. Completely subjective, but absolutely fine one to make.

Quote:
My boyfriend was a server for two years and he has plenty of stories of people being cheap skates. There was one time where one of his coworkers had a near $100 table, and they tipped her just enough to make it the 100 dollars. The manager actually came over to talk to them and asked if there was anything she had done wrong, if they were happy with their service from her. The man who was paying the bill was rather astounded that they'd even ask that and said she was great. Apparently he was either clueless or a cheapskate, one of the two. Maybe both.


Yup. It happens. ****, I've been out to eat with cheapskates. It's painful to sit there are watch someone just rounding the bill for a whole table to the next ten dollars and thinking that's a sufficient tip. But on the flip side, I'll bet your boyfriend has plenty of stories of people giving really great tips as well, right? I've brought this up earlier in the thread, most young people gravitate to wait positions because they are broadly considered the best pay you can get as a still relatively unskilled laborer. That's because of the tips. It's always interesting how often people make the argument that waitstaff are underpaid because of the whole lower base minimum wage thing, but it's really rare to have someone actually say that they made really crappy pay when they were waiting tables. Sure, individual stories of the "bad tip", but overall pay is much better than they could get elsewhere and they know it, even with the lower base pay.

At the end of the day, isn't that the bigger issue? I just think that it's a bit misleading to make a huge deal about a technical pay level while ignoring the actual pay that waitstaff get.

Quote:
I personally try to tip 20%. Sometimes i might do 15 depending on my mood and the pocket book, but I don't go out much. It's what my bf calls server karma. Don't know at this rate if he'll ever be a server again, but just in case.


Yup. I tend to tip well as well (and try to make up for the idiots I know who don't). I tend to tip 15% (rounding up to some convenient value *after* that calculation). I will tip more if the service was particularly excellent, and I'll tip less if it was particularly poor. But it's really got to be me being ****** off at something the server did for it to be that bad, and that's honestly only happened once. I've had a few occasions where other factors in the restaurant were so horrible that I simply never returned (just bad food, bat atmosphere, etc). I usually try to let the staff know why I'm never coming back, but I don't penalize the server for things which often aren't his/her responsibility.

And sometimes, as I've mentioned in this thread, it's not a matter of the food not being good, or the service not being good, but that the price for what you get just isn't worth it. There are several restaurants that try to be high-end and charge high-end prices, but really don't have high end food and service. Fancy tablecloths and nice uniforms doesn't transform $20 food into $50 food. Sorry, it just doesn't. I know that for some people decor and ambiance matter more to them than the food, but I'm a food guy. Those other things are nice, and I'll pay a bit more for them (cause I know it costs more), but the food really needs to be better for me to be willing to pay more. And "better" does not mean a pretty presentation with small portions to make people think it's fancier than it really is. That's pretentious crap that I can't stand. Yes, I'm looking at you Wolfgang!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#251 Dec 14 2012 at 9:47 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
9,022 posts
Gbaji wrote:
That's the position every single person in this thread had said is wrong.


I'm sorry, but this deserves a post of it's own. I'll get the rest later.

You of ALL people can not possibly be pulling the "everyone disagrees with you, so therefore you are wrong" card! As many times that you are in the minority, unless you're avowing your previous arguments as invalid due to being in the minority, that statement holds no weight.

The rules don't magically change when you're in the majority.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 45 All times are in CDT
Debalic, Jophiel, stupidmonkey, Timelordwho, TirithRR, Anonymous Guests (40)