4 ms·

I have a high moral high ground because I don't use these services at all due to poor treatment of employees. It's difficult to conflate the moral high ground

I have a high moral high ground because I don't use these services at all due to poor treatment of employees. It's difficult to conflate the moral high ground with maximal participation in a weird auction format when people are just trying to buy a burrito. In most other countries (like mine Australia) the price of the good is the advertised price. There is no extra weird moral based financial game played on top.

tptacek 1y ago
I mean, OK, but they're treated badly because they're not paid enough, which makes tipping a strange complaint! You could use the service, if you wanted. Just pay what it really costs.
- koolba 1y ago
  > You could use the service, if you wanted. Just pay what it really costs. Then they should have whatever that is be the actual displayed cost. As it stands now, there’s an often delivery fee which apparently does not guarantee and reasonable delivery time. How does that make any sense?
  - kelnos 1y ago
    Oh certainly, it doesn't make sense at all. We should be presented the cost of the service, including a reasonable wage for the driver. But it's a little odd to turn this into a moral issue when the app actually does give you the means to pay the driver what you believe is actually fair, above the base amount being charged. So what this really tells me is that you just think the true cost is more than you want to pay. Which is totally fine.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    It doesn't make any sense and it's purely exploitative. However, you should still tip, because not tipping isn't a protest. You're not hurting doordash by not tipping, you're just hurting the driver and yourself. The driver who, as we've all rightfully pointed out, is already exploited.
    - rounce 1y ago
      Yes so your solution is to buy into that exploitative model? It’s not a tip. A tip is an additional sign of appreciation for the quality of service. When this becomes a compulsory addition (as it seems to be in US culture) it’s simply a hidden tax, paying it in advance of receiving said service is even more ridiculous. In this case - as we seem to have established - it’s a model that hurts both worker and consumer, allowing exploitative employers to externalise costs by presenting a false moral dilemma.
      - ghaff 1y ago
        It's not purely US. In the UK, an "optional" (though not really) ~10% service fee is often added for sit-down service though not if you just pay at the bar. So more like Anglosphere than just US--though US is both higher and more pervasive. I forget what it was the other day but I was asked about a tip for some totally routine retail transaction.
        theshackleford 1y ago
        > more like Anglosphere No such wide spread culture or requirement in 50% of the counties considered to be in the Anglosphere. Whilst it might exist in some capacity, a capacity that is far more limited, not applied in the same manner and easily avoided. It’s not even remotely the same as the situation in the US where it’s effectively mandatory across the board.
        rounce 1y ago
        Ask for it to be removed, it's absolutely optional. In many cases, though not all - because I ask discreetly every time - it doesn't even translate to any benefit for the staff, they get paid the same and it just goes in as general takings which makes it even more of a flagrant piss-take. If I do want to tip as a sign of genuine appreciation I give them cash separately and ask they share it with the kitchen team.
      - const_cast 1y ago
        That's not a solution, but it's what you should be doing. A solution is legislation, any other "solution" is a lie and we should actively disregard anyone who claims otherwise. > it’s a model that hurts both worker and consumer Yes, it is. But by not tipping, you're objectively hurting the worker more. Notice my choice of words here - objectively. That means don't bother trying to argue against it.
- hiq 1y ago
  > they're treated badly because they're not paid enough They're also treated badly because they don't know how much they'll get paid in practice, which makes financial planning even more difficult, including comparing job offers. Instead of just getting the higher-paid job, you get lured into accepting a low-paying one with promises of tips that may or may not materialize. My salary is basically the main thing that's legally enforceable when I sign an employment contract, but I wouldn't even get that if I relied on tips. > Just pay what it really costs. How much is that exactly? Is that +5/10/20% of the initial price? Tipping when it becomes non-negligible completely breaks transparency (as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(market) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(market)) which makes everything less efficient.

tptacek 1y ago

I mean, OK, but they're treated badly because they're not paid enough, which makes tipping a strange complaint! You could use the service, if you wanted. Just pay what it really costs.

koolba 1y ago
> You could use the service, if you wanted. Just pay what it really costs. Then they should have whatever that is be the actual displayed cost. As it stands now, there’s an often delivery fee which apparently does not guarantee and reasonable delivery time. How does that make any sense?
- kelnos 1y ago
  Oh certainly, it doesn't make sense at all. We should be presented the cost of the service, including a reasonable wage for the driver. But it's a little odd to turn this into a moral issue when the app actually does give you the means to pay the driver what you believe is actually fair, above the base amount being charged. So what this really tells me is that you just think the true cost is more than you want to pay. Which is totally fine.
- const_cast 1y ago
  It doesn't make any sense and it's purely exploitative. However, you should still tip, because not tipping isn't a protest. You're not hurting doordash by not tipping, you're just hurting the driver and yourself. The driver who, as we've all rightfully pointed out, is already exploited.
  - rounce 1y ago
    Yes so your solution is to buy into that exploitative model? It’s not a tip. A tip is an additional sign of appreciation for the quality of service. When this becomes a compulsory addition (as it seems to be in US culture) it’s simply a hidden tax, paying it in advance of receiving said service is even more ridiculous. In this case - as we seem to have established - it’s a model that hurts both worker and consumer, allowing exploitative employers to externalise costs by presenting a false moral dilemma.
    - ghaff 1y ago
      It's not purely US. In the UK, an "optional" (though not really) ~10% service fee is often added for sit-down service though not if you just pay at the bar. So more like Anglosphere than just US--though US is both higher and more pervasive. I forget what it was the other day but I was asked about a tip for some totally routine retail transaction.
      - theshackleford 1y ago
        > more like Anglosphere No such wide spread culture or requirement in 50% of the counties considered to be in the Anglosphere. Whilst it might exist in some capacity, a capacity that is far more limited, not applied in the same manner and easily avoided. It’s not even remotely the same as the situation in the US where it’s effectively mandatory across the board.
      - rounce 1y ago
        Ask for it to be removed, it's absolutely optional. In many cases, though not all - because I ask discreetly every time - it doesn't even translate to any benefit for the staff, they get paid the same and it just goes in as general takings which makes it even more of a flagrant piss-take. If I do want to tip as a sign of genuine appreciation I give them cash separately and ask they share it with the kitchen team.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      That's not a solution, but it's what you should be doing. A solution is legislation, any other "solution" is a lie and we should actively disregard anyone who claims otherwise. > it’s a model that hurts both worker and consumer Yes, it is. But by not tipping, you're objectively hurting the worker more. Notice my choice of words here - objectively. That means don't bother trying to argue against it.
hiq 1y ago
> they're treated badly because they're not paid enough They're also treated badly because they don't know how much they'll get paid in practice, which makes financial planning even more difficult, including comparing job offers. Instead of just getting the higher-paid job, you get lured into accepting a low-paying one with promises of tips that may or may not materialize. My salary is basically the main thing that's legally enforceable when I sign an employment contract, but I wouldn't even get that if I relied on tips. > Just pay what it really costs. How much is that exactly? Is that +5/10/20% of the initial price? Tipping when it becomes non-negligible completely breaks transparency (as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(market) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(market)) which makes everything less efficient.