7 ms·

I don't think you should punish the waitstaff for how the management has set up the tipping screen.

RedCondor 4y ago
I think you probably should. Then the wait staff would have a big material incentive to turn against management. The whole "spare the edge" attitude just protects the core, which is by definition always protected by its edge.
- anamexis 4y ago
  "The core" in this case does not benefit from the waitstaff gaining nor losing tips. Also, it's just a matter of empathy.
  - RedCondor 4y ago
    The core absolutely is affected. Total expected compensation includes tips. Employees that don't get what they need will either 1) ask for more salary, 2) work elsewhere, or 3) expose the system as some kind of slavery. Any of these are only set in motion if you stop coddling management's bad decisions.
    - anamexis 4y ago
      In practice, there is no way that waitstaff turnover will actually influence what management choses as the tipping presets on the POS system.
  - bmarquez 4y ago
    > Also, it's just a matter of empathy. Empathy is being weaponized in order to shift the responsibility of wages from the employer to the consumer. In the article, customers are feeling pressured and guilty and are even walking away from the tipping screen. Part of the solution is to first realize what is going on and not feel guilty about that.
Teever 4y ago
Do you think that the waitstaff have no input on the tipping screen at any restaurant, ever?
zeroonetwothree 4y ago
The unemployment rate is almost 0. That means if management doesn’t pay the waitstaff enough they will leave and find a better job. So your tip goes entirely to subsidizing management.
- anamexis 4y ago
  In the real world, there is not a free market mechanism by which waitstaff will change jobs because of the tip presets management have chosen for their POS system.
splix 4y ago
But that's a feedback loop, no? I mean, it still affects the staff so if the staff doesn't like what managers do they either ask the managers to fix it or they quit.
- anamexis 4y ago
  If you're offended by 30% being an option for tips, why not just speak to management directly, and leave what you feel is an appropriate tip to the waiter? I wish tipping did not exist, but as long as it does, it's not an appropriate way to register complaints with the business as a whole.
happytoexplain 4y ago
Historically I've always agreed with your sentiment, but as the problem progresses, we can't keep allowing the system to use employees as a hostage in its negotiation with customers. The kinds of things the parent is describing have real, concrete effects. Already people are tipping at counters where there is absolutely zero "service" in the tipping sense, just because the machine implies they should, and that starts to affect the system (it is becoming harmful to these employees to not tip, just like it's always been harmful to waitstaff to not tip). The same goes for what numbers the machine displays. This has to stop, and at some point, it's going to be hard to avoid the employees being caught in the crossfire. It's important to note that this system also unduly pressures customers, who see these tip screens, and if they therefore believe other people are tipping, but they choose not to, there is a fear of retribution or poor service by the employees who, like waitstaff, have come to materially depend upon (or at least expect) tipping, bit by bit. This is especially stressful in cases where the tip screen is shown at the time of ordering.
cntainer 4y ago
Management is punishing waitstaff by underpaying them and then blaming the customers for not tipping enough.
- safety1st 4y ago
  This is the correct understanding. Management is pitting labor and the customers against each other with this system, for the purpose of screwing them both. The correct answer is to tip zero and leave a comment to the effect of "You need to pay your employees more, not pass that responsibility to me." Employees may not be thrilled with this but it will direct at least part of their ire toward management. Putting as much pressure on management from as many parties as possible is the only solution.
  - anamexis 4y ago
    Do you expect this to actually work? In practice, a small amount of people will not tip in protest, leading to the employees to make less money, and management will not care.
    - toss1 4y ago
      Add to the comment something like, "and I will not be purchasing anything else here until well after this changes"
      - anamexis 4y ago
        Why not just leave the comment, and tip the waitstaff an appropriate amount?
        toss1 4y ago
        We could do that. But the question is now: What is an appropriate amount? Is it the amount that was appropriate for generations, i.e., in a full-service restaurant, 10% for mediocre service, 15% for excellent service, and 20% for truly outstanding service? Or is it the 20/25/30% scale, or the 20/30/40% scale I've seen at a lunch counter, where previous appropriate was nothing or if they had a tip jar, toss a couple bucks? It's an open question, and a screwed-up interaction either way.
kofejnik 4y ago
My transaction is with the business. Staff’s well-being should not be my concern.
- anamexis 4y ago
  Well then presumably you never tip, anywhere. Which is certainly your right, but breaks social mores. Tipping is a terrible system, but it's the system we have. Individuals choosing not to tip is highly unlikely to result in systemic change.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  As long as you inform the staff of this up front I think that's fine. Leaning on the pretense that you aren't also engaged in a transaction with the staff (when it is the common practice) just makes you a shitheel.
kube-system 4y ago
At a quick service restaurant? They should be earning a normal hourly wage. If they consistently get tipped >$30/mo, then their wage can be legally dropped to the tipped minimum wage. That sounds like a punishment.
_3u10 4y ago
The waitstaff is free to quit. Management is free to raise their wages. I'm free not to tip. No one is being punished. I'm not going to be guilted into paying more because mgmt has decided to underpay their staff.
- JadeNB 4y ago
  > The waitstaff is free to quit. Management is free to raise their wages. I'm free not to tip. No one is being punished. This seems to me to be probably literally true but, I think, not true in the meaningful, operational sense. The waitstaff is free to quit, yes, in order probably to be out of a job for at least a few days, to face the hassle of a job search and possible increased scrutiny from future employers, and to experience the same low wages and mistreatment unless they luck into a totally different type of position. It's like an argument that gas-price gouging is OK because I'm free not to fill up my car. You absolutely are not responsible for underpayment by management, but, if you eat at restaurants where managers underpay, you are no longer a neutral third-party; you are now a participant in that system. To extend your argument, if you don't want to be responsible for helping to make up the yawning gap in the workers' wages, you are free not to eat at restaurants.
  - _3u10 4y ago
    Sounds like everyone is exploiting each other equally to me. I have zero issue with gas price gouging. A high price attracts more supply. Leading to an inevitable glut. Rinse wash repeat.
rdtsc 4y ago
Normally I'd agree but in this case the OP seems to have been talking about the default choices going upwards of 20%. I can't imagine at most places waitstaff getting to program the payment terminal's default choices. It's the owner who made that decision and they are ultimately responsible for how they encourage/discourage tipping and compensate their staff. 30% suggested tip might seem nice initially but it might also drive away customers in the longer run. And those customers will never protest much, they'll just leave and not come back. It also signals that "look, we are going above and beyond with our service, we deserve a 30% add-on", but when in reality their service is most basic, or even worse than before, there is a disconnect that people notice.
- darth_avocado 4y ago
  Default being 20 itself is appalling. 20 was for exceptional service.
davidjfelix 4y ago
I felt fine with this justification at 15% when there was equilibrium, but clearly that hasn't prevented the creep of undesirable behavior.
laomai 4y ago
The ultimate beneficiary is the owner since his business model makes an assumption on tipping to employ waitstaff and run a "viable" business. Business models that rely on tipping to cover basic business model costs should be reconsidered. For the business owner, they have to consider the tradeoffs if they want to maintain the current waitstaff: quantity of staff, hours, variety of menu options, decor, desired profitability, amount of automation, quality of food, etc. The immediate beneficiary is the waitstaff, which will no have to reconsider their employment or their demands of the business owner. For the waitstaff, they will move on to other companies that either figure out a business model to pay a livable wage or consider alternative types of positions. Eventually the surviving restaurants will adjust pricing and hourly rates/salaries like every other normal business. There will be positions available for entry level waitstaff and more experienced waitstaff. TLDR: The beneficiaries of tipping overreached — don't be surprised by a backlash. Brief history of tipping in America: https://www.7shifts.com/blog/history-of-tipping-restaurants/ https://www.7shifts.com/blog/history-of-tipping-restaurants/
CraigRo 4y ago
I disagree. Zeroing the tip with a message for management encourages workers to go to less abusive restaurants or to complain on my behalf. It is literally the only way to provide feedback.
- anamexis 4y ago
  You could leave an appropriate tip with a message for management.
  - CraigRo 4y ago
    And they'll be like "well you still paid, you couldn't be that upset"

I think you probably should. Then the wait staff would have a big material incentive to turn against management. The whole "spare the edge" attitude just protects the core, which is by definition always protected by its edge.

anamexis 4y ago
"The core" in this case does not benefit from the waitstaff gaining nor losing tips. Also, it's just a matter of empathy.
- RedCondor 4y ago
  The core absolutely is affected. Total expected compensation includes tips. Employees that don't get what they need will either 1) ask for more salary, 2) work elsewhere, or 3) expose the system as some kind of slavery. Any of these are only set in motion if you stop coddling management's bad decisions.
  - anamexis 4y ago
    In practice, there is no way that waitstaff turnover will actually influence what management choses as the tipping presets on the POS system.
- bmarquez 4y ago
  > Also, it's just a matter of empathy. Empathy is being weaponized in order to shift the responsibility of wages from the employer to the consumer. In the article, customers are feeling pressured and guilty and are even walking away from the tipping screen. Part of the solution is to first realize what is going on and not feel guilty about that.

Teever 4y ago

Do you think that the waitstaff have no input on the tipping screen at any restaurant, ever?

zeroonetwothree 4y ago

The unemployment rate is almost 0. That means if management doesn’t pay the waitstaff enough they will leave and find a better job. So your tip goes entirely to subsidizing management.

anamexis 4y ago
In the real world, there is not a free market mechanism by which waitstaff will change jobs because of the tip presets management have chosen for their POS system.

splix 4y ago

But that's a feedback loop, no? I mean, it still affects the staff so if the staff doesn't like what managers do they either ask the managers to fix it or they quit.

anamexis 4y ago
If you're offended by 30% being an option for tips, why not just speak to management directly, and leave what you feel is an appropriate tip to the waiter? I wish tipping did not exist, but as long as it does, it's not an appropriate way to register complaints with the business as a whole.

happytoexplain 4y ago

Historically I've always agreed with your sentiment, but as the problem progresses, we can't keep allowing the system to use employees as a hostage in its negotiation with customers. The kinds of things the parent is describing have real, concrete effects. Already people are tipping at counters where there is absolutely zero "service" in the tipping sense, just because the machine implies they should, and that starts to affect the system (it is becoming harmful to these employees to not tip, just like it's always been harmful to waitstaff to not tip). The same goes for what numbers the machine displays. This has to stop, and at some point, it's going to be hard to avoid the employees being caught in the crossfire. It's important to note that this system also unduly pressures customers, who see these tip screens, and if they therefore believe other people are tipping, but they choose not to, there is a fear of retribution or poor service by the employees who, like waitstaff, have come to materially depend upon (or at least expect) tipping, bit by bit. This is especially stressful in cases where the tip screen is shown at the time of ordering.

cntainer 4y ago

Management is punishing waitstaff by underpaying them and then blaming the customers for not tipping enough.

safety1st 4y ago
This is the correct understanding. Management is pitting labor and the customers against each other with this system, for the purpose of screwing them both. The correct answer is to tip zero and leave a comment to the effect of "You need to pay your employees more, not pass that responsibility to me." Employees may not be thrilled with this but it will direct at least part of their ire toward management. Putting as much pressure on management from as many parties as possible is the only solution.
- anamexis 4y ago
  Do you expect this to actually work? In practice, a small amount of people will not tip in protest, leading to the employees to make less money, and management will not care.
  - toss1 4y ago
    Add to the comment something like, "and I will not be purchasing anything else here until well after this changes"
    - anamexis 4y ago
      Why not just leave the comment, and tip the waitstaff an appropriate amount?
      - toss1 4y ago
        We could do that. But the question is now: What is an appropriate amount? Is it the amount that was appropriate for generations, i.e., in a full-service restaurant, 10% for mediocre service, 15% for excellent service, and 20% for truly outstanding service? Or is it the 20/25/30% scale, or the 20/30/40% scale I've seen at a lunch counter, where previous appropriate was nothing or if they had a tip jar, toss a couple bucks? It's an open question, and a screwed-up interaction either way.

kofejnik 4y ago

My transaction is with the business. Staff’s well-being should not be my concern.

anamexis 4y ago
Well then presumably you never tip, anywhere. Which is certainly your right, but breaks social mores. Tipping is a terrible system, but it's the system we have. Individuals choosing not to tip is highly unlikely to result in systemic change.
maxerickson 4y ago
As long as you inform the staff of this up front I think that's fine. Leaning on the pretense that you aren't also engaged in a transaction with the staff (when it is the common practice) just makes you a shitheel.

kube-system 4y ago

At a quick service restaurant? They should be earning a normal hourly wage. If they consistently get tipped >$30/mo, then their wage can be legally dropped to the tipped minimum wage. That sounds like a punishment.

_3u10 4y ago

The waitstaff is free to quit. Management is free to raise their wages. I'm free not to tip. No one is being punished. I'm not going to be guilted into paying more because mgmt has decided to underpay their staff.

JadeNB 4y ago
> The waitstaff is free to quit. Management is free to raise their wages. I'm free not to tip. No one is being punished. This seems to me to be probably literally true but, I think, not true in the meaningful, operational sense. The waitstaff is free to quit, yes, in order probably to be out of a job for at least a few days, to face the hassle of a job search and possible increased scrutiny from future employers, and to experience the same low wages and mistreatment unless they luck into a totally different type of position. It's like an argument that gas-price gouging is OK because I'm free not to fill up my car. You absolutely are not responsible for underpayment by management, but, if you eat at restaurants where managers underpay, you are no longer a neutral third-party; you are now a participant in that system. To extend your argument, if you don't want to be responsible for helping to make up the yawning gap in the workers' wages, you are free not to eat at restaurants.
- _3u10 4y ago
  Sounds like everyone is exploiting each other equally to me. I have zero issue with gas price gouging. A high price attracts more supply. Leading to an inevitable glut. Rinse wash repeat.

rdtsc 4y ago

Normally I'd agree but in this case the OP seems to have been talking about the default choices going upwards of 20%. I can't imagine at most places waitstaff getting to program the payment terminal's default choices. It's the owner who made that decision and they are ultimately responsible for how they encourage/discourage tipping and compensate their staff. 30% suggested tip might seem nice initially but it might also drive away customers in the longer run. And those customers will never protest much, they'll just leave and not come back. It also signals that "look, we are going above and beyond with our service, we deserve a 30% add-on", but when in reality their service is most basic, or even worse than before, there is a disconnect that people notice.

darth_avocado 4y ago
Default being 20 itself is appalling. 20 was for exceptional service.

davidjfelix 4y ago

I felt fine with this justification at 15% when there was equilibrium, but clearly that hasn't prevented the creep of undesirable behavior.

laomai 4y ago

The ultimate beneficiary is the owner since his business model makes an assumption on tipping to employ waitstaff and run a "viable" business. Business models that rely on tipping to cover basic business model costs should be reconsidered. For the business owner, they have to consider the tradeoffs if they want to maintain the current waitstaff: quantity of staff, hours, variety of menu options, decor, desired profitability, amount of automation, quality of food, etc. The immediate beneficiary is the waitstaff, which will no have to reconsider their employment or their demands of the business owner. For the waitstaff, they will move on to other companies that either figure out a business model to pay a livable wage or consider alternative types of positions. Eventually the surviving restaurants will adjust pricing and hourly rates/salaries like every other normal business. There will be positions available for entry level waitstaff and more experienced waitstaff. TLDR: The beneficiaries of tipping overreached — don't be surprised by a backlash. Brief history of tipping in America: https://www.7shifts.com/blog/history-of-tipping-restaurants/ https://www.7shifts.com/blog/history-of-tipping-restaurants/

CraigRo 4y ago

I disagree. Zeroing the tip with a message for management encourages workers to go to less abusive restaurants or to complain on my behalf. It is literally the only way to provide feedback.

anamexis 4y ago
You could leave an appropriate tip with a message for management.
- CraigRo 4y ago
  And they'll be like "well you still paid, you couldn't be that upset"