It’s not arbitrary. We tip people who are doing jobs that- in earlier days- our servants would have done.
Of course they’re getting a discount. If we abolished the tipping system, restaurants would have to charge more for the food to cover the costs of paying a minimum wage (or higher) for the wait staff and delivery people. Everyone in the country gets a discount on the price of the food, but most of us make up for that discount by paying extra to the service person in the form of a tip.
Note the use of the qualifier, “effectively.” In effect, they are paying 15% less than the expected price for the meal. The prices reflect the context of social convention. If there was no expectation of a tip for delivery, the cost of that service would be factored into the price, and everyone would necessarily pay more. The tipping system persists because it provides incentive for good service and is ultimately beneficial to customers and management.
Someone who habitually takes the service and fails to deliver the (socially) requisite tip is taking advantage of an honour system to save themselves a bit of money. If I pay $20 for pizza and deliberately stiff the driver, I’ve received a service that is customarily valuated at $3 without paying. This might happen from time-to-time, due to miscalculation or inattention – but if it does, you acknowledge the fault and apologize, and everything’s probably fine – in most cases, you’re going to see the guy again and have an opportunity to make amends. “Sorry, I gave you a crap tip last time, here’s a little extra.” This works this way because you’re dealing with people face to face.
It sounds like your company’s set-up has been encouraging people to avoid that responsibility by insulating them from the transaction. Embarrassing for the receptionist or the security guy, for sure.
I’ll bet dollars-to-doughnuts that the pressure to discourage non-tippers is coming from within your company. Really, the whole situation stinks for everyone except the jerks who neglect to tip.
Oh come on Larry… this is a Pit thread started by someone who is being mindlessly inflamatory and a grade A jerk. What civility does he deserve? He deserves a smackdown.
Good Gods, you’re almost too stupid to remember to breathe. And I thought you weren’t going to respond to me, Donna?
No, you’re just, again, being a pigheaded and obtuse fool who can’t back down an inch even when it’s clear that you’re being a damn fool.
What a fool you are. Who was the “we” he was refering to, if not the people working at the company? Elves? Smurfs?
This is insane… it’s like Sesame Street for crackheads.
Here, since you evidently have the reading comp of a poodle, I’ll help you out. A-fucking-gain.
“A resteraunt wants us (the people who make up the company since “the company” is a linguistic fiction) to tip or they won’t deliver. I don’t wanna (have the company be forced to tip or face non-delivery).”
It is not mandatory that you tip the driver; nor is it mandatory that a restaurant delivers food to your office.
Obviously the business owner has fielded complaints from his drivers about certain businesses not tipping. As an owner he could either: a) do nothing and risk his driver quitting, ergo lost sales; OR b) He can notify the slackers that he will simply not offer delivery if the fine folks at that business aren’t willing to tip the driver for the convenience of having the food delivered to their door.
Extortion? Hardly. He’s simply trying to protect his employees and business.
So, the people ordering the meal DECIDE IN ADVANCE what tip they will be giving? And you’ve been shrieking about how you ALWAYS tip, but that this removes your ability to stop tipping?
But your tips are already not based on service. You are already agreeing to the tip before the service is performed. You don’t handle the server in any way.
Your coworkers screwed you, and you can’t even see it.
That’s as may be, but Otto had information that I was interested in hearing, and an initial request for it (which was seconded) was ignored in favour of a more splenetic exchange.
The information I was after confirms my suspicion that the tipping problem is due to the logistics of how deliveries are handled at Otto’s work address, and that inconsiderate people have been exploiting a situation that makes it easy to stiff on tips. Obviously, this makes things uncomfortable for the people who have to handle the actual transaction. Nobody wants to have to be the person who has to accept delivery and explain (again and again) “I’m sorry, but there’s no tip.”
If possible, I’d like to direct Otto’s attention to how tip evaders at his company negatively effect everyone. The company’s corporate image, the poor schmucks who are obligated to engage in faux pas-by-proxy, every honest person who wants to receive delivery service and is prepared to pay the expected amount, the driver, the operator of the restaurant, everyone except for the putz who feels comfortable omitting the tip because they aren’t the ones who have to look another working person in the eye when they get stiffed.
Who’s the bad guy in this scenario? Even if the restaurants did suggest that deliveries would stop if they couldn’t count on the usual amount of tipping, there’s no blame there – because deliveries to that address pay less than expected. I think it’s more likely that the memo is a bluff from management, though – the simplest way to correct an embarrassing and intolerable situation. If so, I don’t fault them for it, because how else are they going to fix it?
Personally, I’d rather a log was kept and offenders’ names were put in the company newsletter, removing the anonymity that freed them up to behave so shamelessly. I have a feeling that would be hard to carry off without some unpleasantness, though. 
Actually, what I said was that I wasn’t going to exchange insults with you any more. You’re certainly free to continue with your apparent need to include a pointless raving insult in every line of your response; I’ve decided not to respond in kind. Doesn’t mean when you continue to misrepresent what I say that I won’t call you on it.
He was referring to the various individuals who work at the company. You initially said that you thought the “we” referred to the company itself ordering food, like for a company event. That’s not the case, you were wrong from the get-go about it, and now rather than admit it you’re pretending like you meant something else entirely from the start.
But the company is not a linguistic fiction. The company itself can have food delivered (ordered by the people who run the company) and tip or not tip. Individuals who work for the company can also order food for themselves and tip or not tip.
But since I’m the one who’s been making the distinction between “we” the company as a whole and “we” the individuals who make up the company all along, your eleventh-hour attempt to pretend like you’ve been the one saying it it pretty humorous.
Except that, once again, it’s not the company as a singular entity that the memo is talking about, nor have I said a thing about the company being required to tip. The memo is addressed to employees on the individual level, I have always talked about it from the viewpoint of its referring to employees on the individual level, and your continued misinterpretations and responses based on that misinterpretations don’t change that fact.
Actually, I do have the ability to retrieve the tip. If the driver takes too long, I can certainly go back to the desk and reduce the amount of the tip accordingly. Just like at home, I plan on tipping from the time I order but if the driver takes too long I can reduce it.
AMEN! It’s been proven, (I believe in here) that the acronym To Insure Prompt Service is an old wives’ tale/urban legend. However, that’s basically what it means. Why should someone work if they aren’t going to get paid what is fair market value for it (fair market value being the accepted and understood custom of tips).
If we don’t want to pay tips, then we need to accept that these folks need to get paid a wage that is in keeping with the tremendous amount of work that they do. And so on, and so forth, and all the stuff that has been said in these threads whenever they pop up.
And since these threads generally devolve into “shouldn’t tip/Should too” trainwrecks, so I likely just wasted my “breath” there.
The memo in the OP states “not leaving a tip”, which I take to mean the drivers aren’t getting anything, at all.
:rolleyes:
Soldier on.
No, I didn’t. You’re making that up. I simply didn’t parse it down small enough that you could understand. We ----> the company ----> which is made up of people ----> who are individuals.
I’m sorry if collective nouns confuse you. I’m not sorry that I use them, I’m just sorry that you’re confused by them.
Sorry, your inability to understand that a collective noun can, and does, encompass individuals is hardly dishonesty on my part.
Actually, it is, but as you can’t understand collective nouns I’m not going to get into orders of representation here. Suffice it to say, you can not reach out and touch “the company”, only the people who make it up, and the location it’s based at.
Yes, but if it was the corporate brass (watch out, that’s synecdoche, don’t let it confuse you too much), then they wouldn’t have sent a letter to the rest of you, now would they?
So, again, since you’re having oh so very many problems with this, let me do this song and dance, again. Hopefully with enough over elaboration that you’ll understand.
“A resteraunt wants us (----> the company ----> which is made up of people ----> who are individuals) to tip or they won’t deliver. I don’t wanna have the company ( ----> which is made up of people ----> who are individuals) be forced to tip or face non-delivery”
Next week, long division.
A spurious distinction in this case, and one you needled me with only because you are intellectually bankrupt and down to throwing spit wads.
The delivery service wants you (----> the company ----> which is made up of people ----> who are individuals), as a collective, to tip when food is delivered, or they will not deliver. If a bunch of you don’t tip, that still means that a good portion of the time when they deliver to your office, they get stiffed. So they don’t want to do it.
Obviously this was not an isolated incident where a single person didn’t tip once or twice, but a trend large enough that the firm considered stopping giving any and all service to your company.
(----> the company ----> which is made up of people ----> who are individuals)
Do I really have to post it again? Have you, yet, understood the function of a collective noun?
Oh, come on people.I just registered so I could add my 2 cents worth on the tipping subject and now you’re off on a tangent. I expect someone will tell me that I’ve just used the wrong words and why. I would like to argue about tipping. Have i missed my chance?
Amazing… two pages of posts since last night!
Since we’re playing the “Hyperbole and Blowing Things Out Of Proportion” Game, I’m going to throw in a word I think sums up the idea of Tipping:
Fraud.
It’s very simple: If Bob’s Deli wants to charge $3.99 for a BLT (which is awfully cheap, but this is just an example) then turning around and saying the price is actually $4.98 is fraudulent.
A lot of people here have been going on about “Social Contracts”- well, one of the things I have learnt at Law School is that a Contract requires three things: An Offer, Consideration, and Acceptance.
Bob’s Deli has posted an Invitation To Treat- ie, I’m offering to pay Bob’s Deli $3.99 for a BLT- which, by definition, includes the labour necessary to make it, cost of the ingredients, electricity, rent, and presumably a profit, because otherwise Bob wouldn’t be running a Deli. By way of consideration, I am offering Bob $3.99 in whatever the legal currency happens to be, and by providing me with a BLT and taking my money, Bob has communicated his acceptance of said offer. (Bricker or someone will probably come in here and tear this analogy to shreds, however. Even so, that’s my understanding of a Contract under Australian, NZ, and English law).
Bob should not then turn around and demand another 20% of the total price- After I’ve paid for and received the the sandwich because he’s got to pay staff or whatever reason restaurants with tipping use to justify paying their staff bugger all and expecting everyone else to cover their labour costs.
If Bob wanted to put his prices up to $4.98, which breaks down to $3.99 for the BLT and 20% Service Charge, fine. But don’t advertise something at one price then demand more for it- that’s misleading, and Misleading isn’t a Town in England- it’s only a short bus ride from Fraud (which isn’t a City in Norway).
So how does this “Social Contract” thing work? The way I see a Social Contract is this: You work for a living, and pay taxes. Taxes pay for many useful things, including schools, hospitals, police, fire brigades, roads, Social Security, Healthcare (in Australia and Europe) etc.
If you haven’t got a job, the Government will provide you with Welfare while you look for another one. If you get sick, you can get free medical treatment (not as good as if you had Medical Insurance, but still pretty good).
I certainly never agreed to anything about subsidising the Food Lackeys at a restaurant because they don’t get paid very well.
In fact, you know what? When I’m out in a Restaurant, I don’t want exceptional service if it means I have to pay extra in the form of a tip.
I want them to take my order, bring my food, and then leave me the hell alone to enjoy my meal in peace. If I want another drink, I’ll order it from the bar, where I will NOT be tipping the bartender- it’s not that hard to pour drinks. I’ve worked in a bar myself.
And what sort of bullshit is “If you can’t afford to tip, you can’t afford to eat out”?
The 20% “Tip” on top of the price of, say, a $25 meal suddenly means it’s not $25, it’s $30. That $5 is the after dinner coffee, which I’m now not going to buy because I have to pay that money to someone for something that should be part of the listed price of the meal anyway.
I had the same problem with Sales Taxes the last time I was in Californa. Price tag said “$7.99”, but the actual price came to $8.54 because of State Sales Tax or some shit like that.
Again, I know I’m coming from a different culture, but how can anyone, honestly, really, object to a system in which you simply pay the price printed on the menu/price tag/price list, and not a cent more? If the total cost is going to be $8.54, put “$8.54” on the price tag/menu. I don’t care what the State Tax is (as long as it’s shown on the receipt), but I expect the price on the tag/menu to match what gets rung up on the register, regardless of whether the difference is due to Taxes, Tips, Service Charges, or whatever.
I wouldn’t have thought it was too much to ask, but apparently it is…
They’ll know if they got a tip, and how much, when they return to the table after I’ve left. If I want them to keep the money in the folder, I’ll say, “That’s yours. Thank you.” For a waitperson to presume whatever I put in their folder is theirs (particularly since they haven’t looked in the folder) is a sure way to get a smaller tip. What if the bill was $10.59 and I put a $20 in there? Of course it isn’t theirs! What I leave on the table is definitely theirs. What I tell them is theirs is definitely theirs.
And we’re so glad!
Here’s the thing: he’s not demanding it after you’ve paid for and received the sandwich. Beforehand, he expects that, as a decent, polite member of society, you will:
- Order the sandwich using English words or gestures that he can understand;
- Stay on your side of the counter while he stays on his;
- Refrain from barking while he makes the sandwich;
- Take the sandwich somewhere else to eat it (instead of eating it standing up next to the cash register); and
- Provide a tip.
These are all reasonable expectations on his part, given the culture in which you are both operating.
You may decide to break any and all of these expectations. If you do, BEFORE YOU ORDER THE NEXT SANDWICH, he might tell you to get the hell out of his restaurant.
You don’t have a formal, signed contract with Bob. There’s an informal understanding of what each of you will do in the business transaction. If either of you breaks the informal understanding (maybe, while he makes your sandwich, Bob sings a song about how he fucked your whore of a mother last night), either of you can break it off.
Cool, then. Before you eat, let the restaurant know that you don’t intend to tip. That way, they’re fully informed about your intentions, and if they want you as a customer, more power to you.
Of course, when the restaurant is soliciting customers, perhaps they don’t want a customer if it means they have to put up with a nontipper. Shouldn’t they be just as free to make that choice as you are to choose not to tip?
It’s straightforward. Tipping is part of the expected transaction, and the restaurant has an expectation that you’ll tip based on empirical data from other customers, and they offer you service with that expectation. And you KNOW that they’re doing so. If you don’t tip, but you don’t inform them of this ahead of time, who’s the one committing fraud?
I don’t especially object to it, any more than I object to driving on the left hand side of the road. However, you can’t implement either idea one person at a time.
Daniel
I’ve never gotten the point of tips. If they cover some sort of service offered, why isn’t it mandatory? 
Why do I need to tip in a restaurant? I pay them for the cost of the food they serve, the cost of preparing it, the cost of providing an environment in which to eat it (if applicable), is there now some sort of seperate arrangement all of a sudden to get the food from the kitchen to my table between the waiter/waitress and me? If the staff need paid, shouldn’t they look to their employer? If the business has overheads to cover, add it to the cost of the meal.
I’ve never received a better or worse service from any taxi driver or waitress (or their organisations) because of tips that have or have not been left. Tips are usually left when I don’t want to carry around a lot of loose change 
I guess I’ve never understood people who don’t get the point of tips. What other social customs do you flout?
My wife and I went to Norway recently, and I noticedd something a little odd. I’d interact briefly with someone at a business, and at the end of the interaction, I’d say, “Okay, thanks so much!” and they’d say, “You’re welcome,” and I’d head out. Then a moment later, they’d call after me, sounding a little puzzled, “Goodbye!” I’d turn around to see them looking perplexed, and I’d say goodbye, and only then could I leave.
It happened several times, until I finally realized something. Here in the States, the “thanks/you’re welcome” exchange is sufficient to end a quick business conversation; the “goodbye/goodbye” exchange is optional but unnecessary. In Norway, it’s not optional, and by leaving it off, I was breaking their social code.
From a logical, uber-nerd, Mr. Spock perspective, I still think it’s unnecessary. thanks/welcome ends the conversation on a perfectly good note, my having expressed gratitude.
But you know what? I’m not a one-man crusader for Vulcan Etiquette. ONce I realized what was expected, I started trying to remember to say “goodbye” to people before they’d get annoyed at me for what they perceived as walking out on them rudely.
You may not understand the subtleties of the justification for tipping. You don’t really need to. You just need to understand that in some societies, it’s expected, and unless you’ve got a very good reason for flouting the expectation, you should go along with it.
Daniel
“Don’t think, just do” and its equivalents are rarely good bits of advice.
Perhaps that “good reason” could be shitty service?
Whatever you say, Finn. Keep on pretending. Hope you got that all out of your system.
Except saying “Goodbye” to someone doesn’t cost you anything, whereas an invisible 20% charge on top of your bill does.