Banning Bad Tippers?

[muses_nightmare]

I'd rather not have to tip every store I go to just to get service I should be getting anyways.

And that's how i feel about restaurants. Why are they different? They're doing a job they were hired to do, and in many places are actually paid to do. Here in BC when someone is making at least minimum wage, why would I be obligated to pay for the service I should be getting anyway? The service they are paid to give? That's what the hourly wage is for.

[Boozy]

I still don't think someone should be banned for not tipping, even for good service.

It makes no sense to me that you'd acknowledge tipping as an optional activity, but not acknowledge banning a customer as an optional activity.

This woman was free not to tip. But the restaurant is free to not serve her. Non-tippers are not a protected group.

[KnitShoni]

It makes no sense to me that you'd acknowledge tipping as an optional activity, but not acknowledge banning a customer as an optional activity.

This woman was free not to tip. But the restaurant is free to not serve her. Non-tippers are not a protected group.

Thank you. And, I'm sorry, but if this is her favorite restaurant, as she claimed, then you'd think she'd want to be known as a good customer. That didn't happen. It got to the point where NO ONE wanted to serve her, because they weren't being paid for their services. How do you justify not paying for services in your favorite restaurant?

[Anthony K. S.]

Here:

Those of you demanding all servers be paid minimum wage, should state that you're willing to pay much more for your food up front. That is why servers in the US are paid under minimum wage...so that restaurants can charge less for food and make themselves more appealing to customers.

I don't think that anybody here was saying that they weren't willing to pay higher prices so that servers could get better wages.

Unless I'm very much mistaken, I believe their point was that many of the people who say that servers should be paid minimum wage would not be willing to pay higher prices to make that happen.

And I think they're right.

Clearly, muses_nightmare, you would be willing to pay a slightly higher price so that servers could get a more substantial salary.

But I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that there are a lot of people out there who say that servers should be paid minimum wage . . . But these same people would complain vociferously if restaurant prices were to increase as a result of servers getting paid more.

[muses_nightmare]

It makes no sense to me that you'd acknowledge tipping as an optional activity, but not acknowledge banning a customer as an optional activity.

It makes perfect sense. Banning a customer for not paying the optional amount of money that the servers expect makes no sense.

Customers should only be banned if they are abusive towards staff, or are particularly rude. I don't think not tipping or tipping less than is "expected" is particularly rude. Sure it would have been nice of her, and really, I'm not really defending her specifically, but I don't think not tipping is a valid reason to ban a patron.

As for people saying they weren't willing to pay higher prices, that is the impression I get when someone brings up the whole concept of prices increasing if servers are not paid based on tips. Your explanation doesn't change that perception. If they didn't care if prices went up so servers could make minimum wage why would they even bring it up, and be so adamant about defending that notion? Every discussion I've had about tipping comes down to that, and I don't see how anyone can see it any other way.

I do realize arguing this is a Moot point, as things simply aren't going to change. It's an aggravation of mine.

[elsporko]

Thank you. And, I'm sorry, but if this is her favorite restaurant, as she claimed, then you'd think she'd want to be known as a good customer. That didn't happen. It got to the point where NO ONE wanted to serve her, because they weren't being paid for their services. How do you justify not paying for services in your favorite restaurant?

Maybe she can scrape together enough money to go to her favorite restaurant but doesn't have enough funds to justify paying something she doesn't have to. I guess restaurants shouldn't have to serve poor people.

[Rapscallion]

Maybe she can scrape together enough money to go to her favorite restaurant but doesn't have enough funds to justify paying something she doesn't have to. I guess restaurants shouldn't have to serve poor people.

You love being contrary, don't you?

The US legally allows a lower minimum wage for serving staff in the expectation of them being tipped. It taxes them on expected income, whether or not they receive it.

I'm against tipping as a cultural norm, but when I'm in the US I'm more than aware that I'm expected to otherwise someone will not be earning a living wage for their work.

Yes, if someone cannot afford something, they shouldn't get it. It's not a difficult concept. Can't afford a wide screen TV? Fine - don't get it. Can't afford serving staff to attend you? Don't get it.

If you can't afford a necessity then that's another matter, but we're not talking about something that you actually need. We're talking about food served to you - for most people that's a case of go to the kitchen and prepare it, or turn up at a fast food joint and get it there. Unless you're an invalid, or a baby, you do not need to be waited upon.

Rapscallion

[Anthony K. S.]

Maybe she can scrape together enough money to go to her favorite restaurant but doesn't have enough funds to justify paying something she doesn't have to.

That scenario doesn't make any sense.

If somebody is so strapped for cash that they can't spare a few dollars for a tip, then they shouldn't be eating out.

A couple of years ago, I was going through a really bad time, financially, and sometimes I was literally scraping together spare change to cover my bills.

You know what I did?

I ate at home.

It's cheaper than going to a restaurant. Sure, I would have enjoyed eating out, but when your financial resources go down, your quality of life goes down with it. That's life.

As a wise person once said, "If you can't afford to tip, then you can't afford to eat out."

[Boozy]

Customers should only be banned if they are abusive towards staff, or are particularly rude.

Says who? That's terrible business practice.

Customers should be "let go" if they become unprofitable, or cause loss of profit in some other fashion. This woman was a thorn in the side of the restaurant's work force. The owner wisely removed that thorn.

[smileyeagle1021]

Customers should only be banned if they are abusive towards staff, or are particularly rude. I don't think not tipping or tipping less than is "expected" is particularly rude. Sure it would have been nice of her, and really, I'm not really defending her specifically, but I don't think not tipping is a valid reason to ban a patron.

In fairness though... all we know is that she claimed it was because she didn't tip. From what I've seen (granted second hand) is that normally the people who don't leave tips are abusive and rude as well (not that everyone who doesn't tip is abusive and rude or that everyone who is abusive and rude doesn't tip... just that there is a lot of overlap). So the fact that she admits that she doesn't tip makes it more likely that there are other things she is doing too.
That, and as a manager, knowing that overlap between bad tippers and rude customers, I would watch tipping as a warning sign of who will likely cause problems in the future.

[muses_nightmare]

In fairness though... all we know is that she claimed it was because she didn't tip. From what I've seen (granted second hand) is that normally the people who don't leave tips are abusive and rude as well (not that everyone who doesn't tip is abusive and rude or that everyone who is abusive and rude doesn't tip... just that there is a lot of overlap). So the fact that she admits that she doesn't tip makes it more likely that there are other things she is doing too.
That, and as a manager, knowing that overlap between bad tippers and rude customers, I would watch tipping as a warning sign of who will likely cause problems in the future.

I did say I wasn't defending her specifically, as I don't know who she is or how she acts outside of the story. But there are people who are very polite but wouldn't be considered so because they either don't tip, or don't tip as much as is expected. Whether it be 10% or 20% a server should be grateful for a tip. Like I've said, as far as I knew 10% was the norm for okay service, this 15% -20% stuff is not that familiar to me, those were always what I left for good service.

So if someone is actually unaware of the customary percentage, and tips say 10%, should they be banned as a bad tipper? Should they be lumped in with the very rude non-tippers or low tippers? I don't think so.

A customer is only not profitable if they refuse to pay their bill, tipping is an optional thing. What if a server gives absolutely awful service, so a patron doesn't tip, and then the happen to go in to that restaurant again and get the same bad service (admittedly I wouldn't keep going to a restaurant that gives lousy service, but If the food was good I might give it another shot). What if management simply believes the server over the customer? On the surface it looks like management simply defending their staff, but really, it's shitty management not to look into these things, or to at least warn the server of the consequences if it happens again.

What people here seem to be saying is that because servers make less than minimum in many places it is the duty of the customer to pay them out of pocket, rather than their employer. This is the only business I know of that does this, and I really don't know how they get away with it.

[Boozy]

A customer is only not profitable if they refuse to pay their bill, tipping is an optional thing.

That's very short-sighted. A bad customer can cost stores and restaurants in all sorts of ways, even if they pay their bill.

A restaurant owner that stands up for his staff is going to get the cream of the crop when he hires new servers. A good server can and will turn the big spenders into regulars, upsell every table, work extra shifts on short notice, you name it. They can be worth their weight in gold. Employees will do a lot for a business for very little extra money if they're happy and feel valued.

[KnitShoni]

Maybe she can scrape together enough money to go to her favorite restaurant but doesn't have enough funds to justify paying something she doesn't have to. I guess restaurants shouldn't have to serve poor people.

Well, considering restaurants are in business to make money, and going to a restaurant is not a necessity, no, they really shouldn't HAVE to serve poor people. They shouldn't HAVE to serve anyone.

[muses_nightmare]

That's very short-sighted. A bad customer can cost stores and restaurants in all sorts of ways, even if they pay their bill.

And you're assuming someone that doesn't tip is a bad customer.

Also I don't have anything against employers standing up for employees, but really, I've known places where the service was utter crap and even talking to a manager didn't do any good because they refused to believe me, and it wasn't like I was ranting and raving, I'm not the type to do that. Standing up for bad employees is what I have a problem with, if you aren't going to reprimand an employee for doing something wrong repeatedly, you are going to lose business.

[Anthony K. S.]

What people here seem to be saying is that because servers make less than minimum in many places it is the duty of the customer to pay them out of pocket, rather than their employer.

It is at this point that we reach an impasse.

As I noted earlier . . . The position is not that customers should compensate servers for their low salaries. It is that the bill you pay at the end of your meal only constitutes paying for the meal itself.

The tip is now viewed as the payment for the service, presumably on the theory that it encourages servers to give the best service they can, and rewards the ones who do.

At its core, the disagreement we are all having is whether tipping is (1) payment for services rendered, or (2) an "extra" payment out of the customer's pocket, above and beyond what the customer owes for the food and service he/she has received.

Some folks will insist that it is the latter, perhaps because they think it should be that way . . . regardless of whether it actually is or not . . . or, perhaps, because they just don't want to cough up the cash.

Not all, mind you. Some people who take that position really are good tippers . . . but there are, of course, some people who take the position simply because they don't want to give up the money.

My view is that tipping has become part of the cost of eating out, whether you, I, or anybody else likes it or not. However, there are many people who will simply never accept that.

As I said, it is at this point that we've reached our impasse.