Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

TippingFollow

#127 Nov 20 2009 at 8:26 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Typically places with mandatory gratuities have it marked on the menu. I don't know or really care how legally enforcable it is but it seems as though it should be. It's not a "tip" at that point, it's a surcharge for large parties. As long as it's clearly marked, I don't see the problem.
If it is a surcharge it should be called as such. The mandatory 20% for large parties typically goes to the waitperson as their 'tip' versus the establishment to pay for the hassle of a large party (it is not claimed by the restaurant as income).

I think the restaurant went WAY overboard having these people arrested and honestly hope they are chastised - if nothing else the bad publicity should hurt. No tip or a measly tip is fair compensation for CRAP service regardless of the party size.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#128 Nov 20 2009 at 9:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
If it is a surcharge it should be called as such.

Meh. The typical wording "An 18% gratuity will be included for parties of eight or more" or something similar makes it clear enough in my opinion.

Quote:
The mandatory 20% for large parties typically goes to the waitperson as their 'tip' versus the establishment to pay for the hassle of a large party (it is not claimed by the restaurant as income).

It's practically a given that the establishment benefits from requiring 18% or else they wouldn't bother. How they benefit probably varies from location to location; anything from "Keeps the waitstaff happy" to "We'll be taking 5% of that, thank you"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#129 Nov 20 2009 at 9:40 AM Rating: Good
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
If it is a surcharge it should be called as such.

Meh. The typical wording "An 18% gratuity will be included for parties of eight or more" or something similar makes it clear enough in my opinion.

Quote:
The mandatory 20% for large parties typically goes to the waitperson as their 'tip' versus the establishment to pay for the hassle of a large party (it is not claimed by the restaurant as income).

It's practically a given that the establishment benefits from requiring 18% or else they wouldn't bother. How they benefit probably varies from location to location; anything from "Keeps the waitstaff happy" to "We'll be taking 5% of that, thank you"


Well, 5% of 20% isn't much, so they're not benefiting to that great an extent.
#130 Nov 20 2009 at 9:42 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
No, not 5% of 20%, 5% of the bill, so the waitstaff only get 15%.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

#131 Nov 20 2009 at 9:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
No, not 5% of 20%, 5% of the bill, so the waitstaff only get 15%.

I meant this but I was making up example numbers anyway.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#132 Nov 20 2009 at 10:27 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
The last place I worked at (as a waitress) had a minimum 20% tip for parties of six or more. I was able to hand-add it to the bill - the only time this was allowed.

I received it all, but like any tip I turned around and tipped the bartenders and bus help.

I'm not sure how the restaurant benefits. I think it's more to discourage large parties as other have stated. I don't think a restaurant can require a 'tip' and then keep any of those proceeds. It has to go to an employee who is paid on a tipped employee pay scale. At least this is what I would think would be the rules, though I'm sure it varies from state to state.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#133 Nov 20 2009 at 10:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Elinda wrote:
I'm not sure how the restaurant benefits. I think it's more to discourage large parties as other have stated.


It's to shut wait staff up by guaranteeing them a tip, who otherwise complain about large tables. If a restaurant truly wanted to reduce large parties, they'd build all booths or bolt tables to the floor so they can't be moved together.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

#134 Nov 20 2009 at 12:32 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Elinda wrote:
I'm not sure how the restaurant benefits. I think it's more to discourage large parties as other have stated.


It's to shut wait staff up by guaranteeing them a tip, who otherwise complain about large tables. If a restaurant truly wanted to reduce large parties, they'd build all booths or bolt tables to the floor so they can't be moved together.
Large groups stress the kitchen more than the wait staff. It's tough to get a dozen or so piping hot individually prepared meals out to the table at the same time.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#135 Nov 20 2009 at 12:34 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
True Elinda, but no one cares about the kitchen staff in most restaurants. Sad and stupid, but true.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

#136 Nov 20 2009 at 1:03 PM Rating: Good
***
2,824 posts
Come on. You know gbaji is basing this on his experience of going out to Sizzler every other week. He brings his boys and they hoot it up and drink a few beers and malt beverages (I'm sure he still hates the fact that Coors killed Zima). Sally, the waitress, told them they were the best tippers she'd ever had and prefers them to any other table. After a few years she even started comping them potato skins.

Of course that was back when Sizzler was king. Things just aren't the same with all the flair. He kinda like's Applebee's but they don't put foil around their baked potatoes. TGIF is ok but Sally isn't there so there is a hollow feeling after he fills himself with well done steak. Don't worry dude, Sizzler will be back. Everything goes in cycles.
#137 Nov 20 2009 at 2:31 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
baelnic wrote:
Come on. You know gbaji is basing this on his experience of going out to Sizzler every other week. He brings his boys and they hoot it up and drink a few beers and malt beverages (I'm sure he still hates the fact that Coors killed Zima). Sally, the waitress, told them they were the best tippers she'd ever had and prefers them to any other table. After a few years she even started comping them potato skins.

Of course that was back when Sizzler was king. Things just aren't the same with all the flair. He kinda like's Applebee's but they don't put foil around their baked potatoes. TGIF is ok but Sally isn't there so there is a hollow feeling after he fills himself with well done steak. Don't worry dude, Sizzler will be back. Everything goes in cycles.
I thought varus was the one who was trying to assert his "class" in the most painfully tacky way possible.
#138 Nov 20 2009 at 2:31 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
Tipping is easy

Minimum 3 dollars or 20% (20% is kinda cheap if it's just a 5 dollar breakfast at waffle house)
25% if you're cool

However, because I eat at places where I never have more than a 20$ bill, this is easy. Then again, if you can't afford a 20% tip and can afford a 120$ meal, then one of those statements is false.
#139 Nov 20 2009 at 2:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
20%

Don't make me start ranting about tip creep again.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#140 Nov 20 2009 at 2:34 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
20%

Don't make me start ranting about tip creep again.
Am I stepping on your lawn?
#141 Nov 20 2009 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sweetums wrote:
Am I stepping on your lawn?

You God damn kids with your "color televisions" and your "FM radios" and your "20% tips"... Smiley: motz
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#142 Nov 20 2009 at 2:43 PM Rating: Good
I stiff everyone, without exception, because happiness is a zero sum game.
#143 Nov 20 2009 at 2:49 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
20%

Don't make me start ranting about tip creep again.


Much more often its the 3$ minimum.
#144 Nov 20 2009 at 5:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
20%

Don't make me start ranting about tip creep again.
To hell with them all Joph. I still go by the 15% base rule. I don't ever tip 15%, more like 25-30%, but I'm former waitstaff, so I tend to be generous, having paid for school waiting. Anyway, 15% is still the base to work from.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

#145 Nov 20 2009 at 8:49 PM Rating: Good
I normally tip either nothing or enough to bring the bill up to the first multiple of 50 cents (well, usually 50 cents - if it's over $50, nearest multiple of $2.50 instead) over 15%/20%. Makes for weird tip amounts sometimes, but it also makes the checkbook easier to keep track of.

There are rare exceptions (service is wtfexcellent but not intrusive, I'm not broke) where I'll hit 25% as the base figure. I think in the last ten years, that's happened maybe half a dozen times.
#146 Nov 20 2009 at 8:51 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Bardalicious wrote:
gbaji wrote:

First off Ugly said 50% "at most". But whatever.

Why is it you will take Ugly's experience as fact but you won't take mine? But fine, have it your way.


Because I was responding to a post which quoted Ugly? I actually think Ugly's estimate is high. I stated that it's more likely about 20%. There's a perception that large parties stay around longer, but perception and statistical reality typically differ by quite a bit. The once in a blue moon really large party that sits there whooping it up for hours taking up your table sticks in your memory more than the 50 times that smaller groups do the same thing. But "on average" doesn't mean you get to just go on gut.


And guess what? If you contrive the math to include the one factor which you've decided is important (larger parties taking longer), and ignoring every other factor which I've repeatedly stated counteracts that one, then yes, magically your numbers will show that large parties are "bad".


At the end of the day, it's going to depend on how the tables are divided up in the restaurant, how said tables are apportioned to the wait staff, what sort of restaurant we're talking about, and probably a zillion other factors. I was simply responding to someone's silly argument that the inclusion of gratuity on the bill for large parties had to do somehow with them being inherently harder on the wait staff. We can sit here debating time and labor factors all day long, but the simpler approach is to ask if that included gratuity on the bill is designed to be in addition to a normal tip, or instead of one.


Clearly it's designed to replace the normal tip. Thus, it's *not* about applying extra cost for larger parties. It's about making sure you pay a sufficient tip. Period. So I win and you lose! ;)


Oh. And the even more more more relevant issue is that the argument kept me from getting super bored while doing a tedious 4.5 hour image installation. I honestly don't give a rats behind about whether or not someone working as a waiter really prefers working large tables or small ones. Do whatever you want. It's not like I work in that field...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#147 Nov 20 2009 at 10:23 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
And guess what? If you contrive the math to include the one factor which you've decided is important (larger parties taking longer), and ignoring every other factor which I've repeatedly stated counteracts that one, then yes, magically your numbers will show that large parties are "bad".
Funny, I didn't make any sort of judgment as to whether or not large parties are bad.

They are suboptimal for total tips, though, in general, solely because of the whole "your tips are generally proportionate to the number of times the tables you're waiting get turned over" bit that crops up in the math. Basically, you have a choice to make: a (potentially) easier night, or one with more tips. I'm not sure why you have such an objection to the idea that an easier job should pay less per hour. It seems out of character with conservative principles (work hard, and you get what you earn; slack off, and you get to die lonely and broke in a gutter :-D).

Edited, Nov 20th 2009 8:35pm by MDenham
#148 Nov 21 2009 at 12:48 PM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
gbaji wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
gbaji wrote:

First off Ugly said 50% "at most". But whatever.

Why is it you will take Ugly's experience as fact but you won't take mine? But fine, have it your way.


Because I was responding to a post which quoted Ugly? I actually think Ugly's estimate is high. I stated that it's more likely about 20%.

bolded the important words for you. You think, but you have no idea.

gbaji wrote:
There's a perception that large parties stay around longer, but perception and statistical reality typically differ by quite a bit. The once in a blue moon really large party that sits there whooping it up for hours taking up your table sticks in your memory more than the 50 times that smaller groups do the same thing. But "on average" doesn't mean you get to just go on gut.

Are you saying that I only "perceived" timing large and small parties with my coworkers and comparing the times? Are you saying I only "perceived" having two rotations of smaller tables during a large party? Thanks for waking me up and bringing me back to your reality.



gbaji wrote:
And guess what? If you contrive the math to include the one factor which you've decided is important (larger parties taking longer), and ignoring every other factor which I've repeatedly stated counteracts that one, then yes, magically your numbers will show that large parties are "bad".
Which variables counteract it?
You're the one that wants to ignore variables that go against your hypothesis.

gbaji wrote:
I was simply responding to someone's silly argument that the inclusion of gratuity on the bill for large parties had to do somehow with them being inherently harder on the wait staff. We can sit here debating time and labor factors all day long, but the simpler approach is to ask if that included gratuity on the bill is designed to be in addition to a normal tip, or instead of one.

automatic gratuity isn't because the larger tables are inherently harder. It's for the server so that they don't get shafted by a large group going through price shock and scrimping on the tip. It's to make sure that server doesn't get shafted after losing a chunk of his/her section for a long period of time.


gbaji wrote:
Clearly it's designed to replace the normal tip. Thus, it's *not* about applying extra cost for larger parties. It's about making sure you pay a sufficient tip. Period. So I win and you lose! ;)

You're changing your argument. You said that it was a suggestion and that you don't have to pay it, which is wrong.


garbaji wrote:
Oh. And the even more more more relevant issue is that the argument kept me from getting super bored while doing a tedious 4.5 hour image installation. I honestly don't give a rats behind about whether or not someone working as a waiter really prefers working large tables or small ones. Do whatever you want. It's not like I work in that field...

No, but you have an incessant need to be the expert on any and all fields or ideas. It really burns you up inside when you're wrong, so much so that you can't admit it to yourself. I'd probably attribute it to a lack of self-esteem, whether it be because daddy never hugged you, your lack of intimacy with another person, or maybe it's just because you have an incredibly small *****. Whatever the case, I'm sure that you will be more than happy to reach back into your "expertise" of "I have friends in the field!" to attempt to rebut real life experience.
#149 Nov 21 2009 at 1:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Quote:
Are you saying that I only "perceived" timing large and small parties with my coworkers and comparing the times? Are you saying I only "perceived" having two rotations of smaller tables during a large party? Thanks for waking me up and bringing me back to your reality.
Even if he were right, the fact still remains that when you do have a small table sitting around, you still have 3-4 more tables rotating. That's 20-25% of your section, not 40-50%.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

#150 Nov 21 2009 at 11:59 PM Rating: Decent
Tip your waiter 15% if they bothered to show up for work, more if they excel at their job.

Not doing so is cheap. & if service is horrible, take it up with the manager.

Also, if the food gets comped; TIP MORE. It's free, but you should still tip an appropriate amount.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#151 Nov 22 2009 at 12:14 AM Rating: Good
Omegavegeta wrote:
Tip your waiter 15% if they bothered to show up for work, more if they excel at their job.

Not doing so is cheap. & if service is horrible, take it up with the manager.
Another "tipping is mandatory"?

Seriously?

GTFO. I'll take 15% of your posts as compensation.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 400 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (400)