Pastor/Waitress incident at Applebee's [Archive]

Jim3k

02-01-2013, 12:47 PM

The law of unintended consequences is clearly at work here. First the pastor, in trying to object to a restaurant policy, took it out on the server, probably not the true target of her anger. By invoking God, though, she ironically showed her non-Christian self. In addition, she apparently doesn't understand that there are two sides to tipping. The first is that in many states (and I think MO, the state here, is one) permit tips to be folded into the payroll for pay calculations, meaning the tip is not 'extra.' Second, assuming that it is proper to withhold a tip for poor service, there is nothing in the pastor's comment to suggest that the server here had provided poor service, so the full deduction was entirely unjustified vis-a-vis the server. She could have paid 15% and made her point. The pastor's self-righteous flame then burned both herself and the photo-shooting co-worker when she only intended to sting Applebee's. What?--the pastor thought her note would go unnoticed? Puh-leaze.

And the picture-taker was the victim of Applebee's over-reaction to an understandable employee response to the pastor's unfair treatment. She thought the pastor was out-of-line (which she was), but never thought that her employer would react so harshly to posting the pic. So this individual, too, clearly misjudged what the likely response would be. Didn't she think the overly-sensitive pastor might continue to be overly-sensitive and respond by complaining some more?

And now Applebee's is taking some public relations heat over its firing the picture-taking co-worker. A warning would not have been sufficient? Embarrassed now, will it back off and reverse the discharge?

The pastor may not have intended for anyone to be fired, but she set this chain of events in motion. I wouldn't be surprised if her church's leadership now fired her for violating the tenets of Christian charity it no doubt espouses. Absolutely no one in this episode ever took the time to think what the consequences of their conduct might be or how their behavior would be perceived by others.

Not only is the law of unintended consequences in play, I suspect Murphy's law is, too. What can go wrong, will go wrong.

TruBlu

02-01-2013, 12:58 PM

Always, always tip a bare-as$ minimum of 15%. But 20% is better. If you can afford to eat out, you can afford to tip decently.

And more if she's hot, unless your wife disagrees that she's hot.

Sorry to take us back, but I noticed this post from previous years.

I intentionally don't take my wife to places where I know the waitresses are hot, and go by myself for two reasons:

1) To stay out of trouble for "glancing" at the waitress too often and too long.
2) I can tip as much as I want/can afford.

Blue in the Face

02-01-2013, 01:28 PM

And the picture-taker was the victim of Applebee's over-reaction to an understandable employee response to the pastor's unfair treatment. She thought the pastor was out-of-line (which she was), but never thought that her employer would react so harshly to posting the pic. So this individual, too, clearly misjudged what the likely response would be. Didn't she think the overly-sensitive pastor might continue to be overly-sensitive and respond by complaining some more?

And now Applebee's is taking some public relations heat over its firing the picture-taking co-worker. A warning would not have been sufficient? Embarrassed now, will it back off and reverse the discharge?

While I think a warning certainly could have been sufficient, I don't think Applebee's overreacted at all. I don't think posting a customer's receipt, even an onbnoxious customer's receipt, on the internet is remotely appropriate, and I think termination is a reasonable response. Like gus said, I'd be livid if that were done to me, and while I don't think I'd ever behave as this customer did, I don't think that behavior excuses making their receipt public. I don't think it would be inappropriate if they merely disciplined the server (though I might if I that were my receipt), but I similarly don't think it's at all inappropriate that they fired her.

CDu

02-01-2013, 02:22 PM

While I think a warning certainly could have been sufficient, I don't think Applebee's overreacted at all. I don't think posting a customer's receipt, even an onbnoxious customer's receipt, on the internet is remotely appropriate, and I think termination is a reasonable response. Like gus said, I'd be livid if that were done to me, and while I don't think I'd ever behave as this customer did, I don't think that behavior excuses making their receipt public. I don't think it would be inappropriate if they merely disciplined the server (though I might if I that were my receipt), but I similarly don't think it's at all inappropriate that they fired her.

I agree with this. Having waited tables, I know how annoying it is for customers to pull [junk] like this. They don't get paid a salary (the minimal salary they get goes away when they tax for tips), so tips are the only real payment. For folks to stiff or undertip is just really unacceptable. If you don't want to tip at a minimum 15%, you shouldn't be eating in a sit-down restaurant. Don't want to tip? Go to McDonald's.

That being said, it's also totally inappropriate to publish a customer's receipt. Even if said receipt involved an offensive comment, you just can't do that. She could have simply posted a transcript of the receipt and gotten roughly the same response, while maintaining the anonymity of the customer and conceivably the restaurant.

The waitress was right to be offended by the customer. But that doesn't make what she did in response acceptable in any way.

Jim3k

02-01-2013, 02:26 PM

While I think a warning certainly could have been sufficient, I don't think Applebee's overreacted at all. I don't think posting a customer's receipt, even an onbnoxious customer's receipt, on the internet is remotely appropriate, and I think termination is a reasonable response.

Did I suggest that firing was unreasonable? I did say that it was an overreaction. It was misconduct to be sure, so some sort of discipline was to be expected. But consider: Firing is the ultimate employee punishment. Generally discipline is best served with education. So progressive discipline is the best policy. It is reasoned and leads to a better employee. Here, IMO, it was a penalty that was not proportional to the misconduct. Keep in mind that while the customer's name was exposed, the credit card number was not and there was no dishonesty or violence by the employee, which even an untrained worker would know was grounds for summary discharge. So I think Applebee's over-penalized this server and thereby was overreacting. (I'd be interested in the rules set forth in the employee handbook to see if progressive discipline is the policy.)

Despite the aphorism, the customer is not always right. This customer was clearly wrong, essentially stealing part of the employee's pay, unfairness which provoked the employee misconduct. Such provocations should always be considered during the disciplinary process. Here it was not. If a warning was not deemed strong enough, a suspension could have been considered. In the overview, summary discharge seems too harsh.

duke74

02-01-2013, 02:31 PM

I often take out a reasonably large group. The add-on is often tacked on as a "service charge" because of the extra effort required for the table to be served, etc. And, I guess thus to protect the servers from undertipping. In those cases, I add an add'l amount for the server(s), as I never know whether they get the full amount as a gratuity, much as I do in Europe. (I am generally a 20% tipper.)

I believe (not an atty) that such add-ons are not legally enforceable in NYS, which would suggest (to me) that the legislators view them as gratuities.

In my view, unless there was a service issue, the pastor was WAY out of line. Additionally, unless I read the picture wrong, she gave NOTHING to the server(s). So she was inappropriate and cheap. On the other hand, the server did embarrass her employer. (The risks and legal implications of social media use immediately spring to mind.) If I were her employer, I would have admonished her (unless this was a pattern or there were previous "demerits" - not clear from the story). And if I were the server, I would have redacted the receipt before posting...if I posted it at all.

snowdenscold

02-01-2013, 02:50 PM

Pastor should give 20% to the church and then the problem's solved.

CDu

02-01-2013, 03:36 PM

I often take out a reasonably large group. The add-on is often tacked on as a "service charge" because of the extra effort required for the table to be served, etc. And, I guess thus to protect the servers from undertipping. In those cases, I add an add'l amount for the server(s), as I never know whether they get the full amount as a gratuity, much as I do in Europe. (I am generally a 20% tipper.)

With regard to gratuity, it varies by restaurant. But generally speaking, waiters give a small portion of their tips to the following folks (if applicable):
- bartender
- back waiter
- busboy

But in my experience, that percentage rarely went above 25% of tips. However, they also get taxed on tips (though they only have to report a certain percentage of their food sales to the IRS, so there is wiggle room there).

But, they generally get no salary of note. As of 2012, the wage for a waiter was $2.13 in many, if not most, states*. So once taxes are applied on tips, the salary is essentially zero (I often had to pay the restaurant back money because my salary didn't cover taxes).

So, giving a $0 tip (on what was likely a large bill) didn't just mean the waiter didn't get extra income. It actually cost her money (the bill contributes to her taxed amount, but she got no income from it).

* there are some states in which waiters make minimum wage in addition to tips. But that number of states is very small.

davekay1971

02-01-2013, 03:57 PM

i do NOT like the automatically added tip......i complain immediately to the manager.

***I'LL** decide what the tip is......

While I agree in principle with you, the reality is that most restaurants add the auto-tip because parties of 8 or more USUALLY involve split checks. I had this very discussion with a few relatives/in-laws who work in the business and they all confirm that, when they serve a large group, the total of the groups' tips are almost always smaller when the checks are split than they would are if the check is kept whole. I'm not sure why that is, whether people tend to round down, or what, but they all confirm it's an obvious trend. They prefer working in restaurants with the auto-tip for large groups because they feel like they're protected from this tendency.

The pastor certainly needs to try applying a little of the Bible's messages to the way she treats people. And her attitude about the whole incident just shows that she's embarrassed that she got called out for acting like a jerk, rather than being truly sorry for acting like a jerk in the first place.

If the server in question moves to Winston-Salem or Charlotte, I could hook her up with a waitressing job in no time at all!

InSpades

02-01-2013, 04:01 PM

tecumseh

02-01-2013, 04:57 PM

The obvious thing is it shows ignorance on the part of the pastor...like you don't get out much. A add on tip for a large party is pretty standard and in fact one needs to look carefully for this whenever you have a party of 5 or more. There is a very good reason for this some people don't tip. I remember working at a higher end Chinese restaurant and a large party for a Chinese New Years party stiffed the waiters, now you had two waiters who had spent most of the evening working this large party while the other waiters were doing very well upstairs. Fortunately I had a good manager and he made up out of the drawer to the waiters. For people concerned about it shorting the staff...you can add on. Or commonly if it is a large party some people will leave cash on the table if they think the service was very good.

You would think the pastor would be a little sheepish when she realizes how standard this sort of practice is. It also clearly shows she thinks tipping more than 10% is excessive. Kind of funny the rationale people have for being cheap. I bet would be dollars to donuts this woman has never tipped more than 10% in her life.

Mal

02-01-2013, 05:00 PM

I think someone needs to mention how idiotic the pastor's analogizing of tithing to tipping is, too. :p

The better course of action for the server in this case would have been to share the story with her co-workers, and the next time that pastor made it in, the applicable server provide her atrocious service (but treat the rest of the table well), and when she complained, say "For zero tip, you're gonna have to ask God to bring your sandwich a little quicker, reverend." Or perhaps just share info. on the pastor with the staff at other restaurants around town. Although I guess this accomplished that. She'd be well advised not to eat out for quite some time.

I do occasionally take a little umbrage at the automatic gratuity for larger parties thing. Partly because it's presumptuous, and makes it seem like the optionality of tipping (which is, or course, a practical fiction, anyway) has been erased. But it's also because, as someone who was a server for a couple summers in college, I recognize full well what a bigger group means. You're reading the specials multiple times, and coming back to the table twice as much because someone's inevitably not paying attention when you ask if people need another drink, so they ask you when you come back with everyone else's. And people in large groups also tend to order more food and share more plates, and generally scale up the amount of work required from the server more than arithmetically. So, I always tip well in a big group, and admonish friends to as well by making the observation "He/she worked really hard for us" publicly or whatever. So I don't need to be reminded by the menu or by management that I should be tipping that person. It's insulting. That's not what they intend, but it's inevitably received that way.

InSpades

02-01-2013, 05:31 PM

I think someone needs to mention how idiotic the pastor's analogizing of tithing to tipping is, too. :p

Agreed. It's not like you tithe less when you think god as done a bad job.

The better course of action for the server in this case would have been to share the story with her co-workers, and the next time that pastor made it in, the applicable server provide her atrocious service (but treat the rest of the table well), and when she complained, say "For zero tip, you're gonna have to ask God to bring your sandwich a little quicker, reverend." Or perhaps just share info. on the pastor with the staff at other restaurants around town. Although I guess this accomplished that. She'd be well advised not to eat out for quite some time.

I think a better response would be to serve everyone to the best of her ability. When it came time for the bill say something along the lines of "An 18% gratuity has been included per company policy, feel free to tip whatever you feel is appropriate for the level of service I have provided". With or without a wink in the pastor's direction.

Honestly, lowering yourself to the level of others rarely reflects good on yourself.

tommy

02-01-2013, 05:56 PM

The better course of action for the server in this case would have been to share the story with her co-workers, and the next time that pastor made it in, the applicable server provide her atrocious service (but treat the rest of the table well), and when she complained, say "For zero tip, you're gonna have to ask God to bring your sandwich a little quicker, reverend."

Now that's a good way to get fired.

Or perhaps just share info. on the pastor with the staff at other restaurants around town.

Much better.

What I'd be interested in knowing is if there was more going on here with this employee. Did Applebee's have some ulterior motive for terminating her, and firing her for posting this check provided a convenient excuse to get rid of her for some other, unlawul reason? Had she recently filed a workers comp claim? Did she recently file a sexual harassment claim against a manager? Has she been making noises about trying to form a union? Affirmative responses to any of those kinds of things would make this whole thing much more interesting from a legal perspective.

mph

02-01-2013, 06:17 PM

Pastor should give 20% to the church and then the problem's solved.

Wish I could give you positive feedback for this one. Love it.

davekay1971

02-01-2013, 08:45 PM

Agreed. It's not like you tithe less when you think god as done a bad job..

Really? Because I tithed less every time Carolina, UConn, and KY won the natty. And when Ke$ha happened.

DukieInKansas

02-01-2013, 11:11 PM

Really? Because I tithed less every time Carolina, UConn, and KY won the natty. And when Ke$ha happened.

Isn't a tithe, by definition, 10%? If so, how can you tithe less?

Most restaurants inform you ahead of time about the policy about gratuity for large parties. If the Pastor didn't like the 18%, she should have left the restaurant without being served. I think, by sitting at a table with a "large party", the party agreed to pay the gratuity. Therefore, she shouldn't have made any adjustment or comment on the receipt. She was wrong. The server that posted the receipt should have made sure the signature was not visible whe she posted it. From the little part of the receipt I saw, I think she could have shown the comment without showing any of the signature. The Pastor would have know the post was direct to her if she ever heard about it and would have had to live with that feeling. If she then opted to approach Applebee's, any publicity surrounding her actions would have been due to her outing herself.

The benefits of hindsight.

davekay1971

02-02-2013, 09:04 AM

Isn't a tithe, by definition, 10%? If so, how can you tithe less?.

In the interest of accurately picking the nits, and since it's a Saturday morning and my family is sleeping in and I have nothing better to do, I looked it up.

According to Mirriam-Webster, a tithe is, indeed, traditionally used to mean specifically a tenth. The word derived from the Old English teogotha, akin to Low German tegede, and Old English tien. Now, however, tithe does have the accepted meaning, more broadly, of giving "a small part". Perhaps this is an example of the falling standards of proper use of the English language (a failing I'll freely admit), but, according to modern definitions, one can, indeed, tithe less.

By the way, in looking this up, I learned something new this morning. Now to go drink coffee...

PS: I suppose by the proper definition, in which a tithe is a tenth, one could tithe less by concealing one's true income (ask my wife about her biological father's creative accounting when it came to calculating child support obligations). However, if we're discussing tithing to the church, one should consider that you can hide your income from the church...but you can't hide it from God. Do you really want St. Peter pulling out the ledger and doing an audit on you at the Pearly Gates? I didn't think so...

Kimist

02-02-2013, 11:11 AM

I saw this event being discussed on several news reports.

#1 - The restaurant was entirely within its rights to dismiss the employee. Regardless of any "issues" involved, posting negative comments about a business and/or private individual on a public forum cannot be tolerated. It's basic Business 101 guidelines.

#2 - I would love to know more about this "minister." Does not sound as if she has all her ducks in a row vis a vis acting in a Christian way.

#3 - The automatic tip for large parties is inherent at virtually all eating establishments. Your choice should be either to pay it, or take your business elsewhere.

#4 - The "minister" not only balked at the 18% tip, but wrote in "zero" for the tip. (See #2 above.)

My daughters worked as waitresses in several jobs, and they had many stories to tell. Sadly, some people can just be a [can't say it here, but you know what I mean] at times.

k

budwom

02-02-2013, 12:17 PM

In the interest of accurately picking the nits, and since it's a Saturday morning and my family is sleeping in and I have nothing better to do, I looked it up.

According to Mirriam-Webster, a tithe is, indeed, traditionally used to mean specifically a tenth. The word derived from the Old English teogotha, akin to Low German tegede, and Old English tien. Now, however, tithe does have the accepted meaning, more broadly, of giving "a small part". Perhaps this is an example of the falling standards of proper use of the English language (a failing I'll freely admit), but, according to modern definitions, one can, indeed, tithe less.

By the way, in looking this up, I learned something new this morning. Now to go drink coffee...

PS: I suppose by the proper definition, in which a tithe is a tenth, one could tithe less by concealing one's true income (ask my wife about her biological father's creative accounting when it came to calculating child support obligations). However, if we're discussing tithing to the church, one should consider that you can hide your income from the church...but you can't hide it from God. Do you really want St. Peter pulling out the ledger and doing an audit on you at the Pearly Gates? I didn't think so...

Linguistically the word "decimate" is similar in that literally it means a tenth but in common usage it often refers to a larger percentage, e.g. Duke's secondary was decimated by injuries this year...in this case it was more like quintomated or halfomated.

davekay1971

02-02-2013, 12:30 PM

Olympic Fan

02-02-2013, 12:39 PM

Linguistically the word "decimate" is similar in that literally it means a tenth but in common usage it often refers to a larger percentage, e.g. Duke's secondary was decimated by injuries this year...in this case it was more like quintomated or halfomated.

Your comment reminds me of a great line I saw the other night on TV. A character, confused by a certain word usage declares: "I'm going to check the entomology of that word." When he returns, another character asked him what he learned. His answer: "I learned that entomology is the study of insects, not words."

To me, that's a pretty good illustration of our sloppy use of language.

As for "decimate" -- while we use it the describe a group or unit that has been severely weakened, the original etymology of the word was a Roman punishment for a unit that had misbehaved. Every 10th solider was selected by lot and his nine lucky comrades would then kill him. They wouldn't think of using the word (as we would) to describe a unit that had been severely mauled in battle.

tecumseh

02-02-2013, 02:55 PM

Mal
Like I said you should look at the automatic tip as insurance for the server. Just too much risk to let it all to "chance"

CDu

02-03-2013, 10:35 AM

I'm not sure how the bill adds to her taxable amount. Don't they just declare the tips as income? So if they get no tips they have no income? I've never waitered or waitressed so I could be completely wrong.

At the end of the day the waitress who got stiffed is out $6.29. I'm sure it's not the end of the world for her. Also the girl who posted the receipt wasn't even the "stiffed" waitress if I read the story correctly.

The girl who posted the receipt showed terrible judgement. I'm not surprised she was let go.

Sorry for not clarifying on this. The restaurants are the ones that declare the tip amount (it'd be way too much work for a waiter to do this). Most restaurants don't report the actual tips for tax purposes. They typically report X% of a waiter's total sales for tax purposes (because some tips are given in cash directly to the waiter), and the IRS doesn't usually push it further than that. That X% is usually less than what the waiter actually makes in tips. I would be surprised if Applebee's worked any differently than this.

So the bill would go toward her total sales, which is what Applebee's would use to report tip estimate. So by not tipping, the customer's bill adds to the taxable sale total but not to the tip total.

Now, your point is accurate that the $34 bill wouldn't be a huge drain, and the $6.29 stiff wouldn't be backbreaking. But that's not the point. Why is it fair for the customer to make the waiter serve him or her for free (actually, at a very small loss)?

I also agree that the waiter who posted the receipt used very poor judgment, and have no problem with the firing. I was just trying to give a clearer perspective of the process from the waiter's side.

Jarhead

02-03-2013, 01:22 PM

...I also agree that the waiter who posted the receipt used very poor judgment, and have no problem with the firing. I was just trying to give a clearer perspective of the process from the waiter's side.

It wasn't exactly clear to me as to who posted the receipt. The woman who served to table was the one fired, but in the early stages of the story it was reported that someone else did the posting. If that's the case the wrong person was fired. Not a nice outcome. About the 18%, doesn't that usually only apply when separate checks are requested by larger groups?

JasonEvans

02-03-2013, 02:43 PM

Hang on a sec-- I know who is to blame here and it is the restaurant itself. Here's why...

The 18% tip for large parties was not a "suggestion," it was policy. When the cheap pastor chose not to pay it, it was the same as if the pastor had ordered a dessert and then refused to pay for that. It is as if the pastor refused to pay taxes and just crossed out the tax line on the bill and refused to pay that. There is a simple solution here which is for the manager to confront the pastor and inform them that they are committing theft by not paying the full bill.

The blame for starting all this is the restaurant for having a policy that it did not enforce, thereby putting the employee in a difficult situation.

Personally, while I understand the restaurant being upset that the private bill was made public, the pastor should know better than to leave a note that would be embarrassing if it was seen by others. The truly "Christian" thing to do is not to act in a way where your actions would be embarrassing if they were made known to others. You should always act as if everything you did was going to be posted on the internet for all to see. That is the best way to ensure you are going through life in an honorable fashion.

The fact that the pastor felt embarrassed meant that she knew her actions were improper and in poor taste. Shame on her. She deserves all of our scorn.

-Jason "the sad thing is that the bill was just for $34 -- all this is over a cheap, nasty pastor not paying a $6 tip" Evans

budwom

02-03-2013, 04:24 PM

Your comment reminds me of a great line I saw the other night on TV. A character, confused by a certain word usage declares: "I'm going to check the entomology of that word." When he returns, another character asked him what he learned. His answer: "I learned that entomology is the study of insects, not words."

To me, that's a pretty good illustration of our sloppy use of language.

As for "decimate" -- while we use it the describe a group or unit that has been severely weakened, the original etymology of the word was a Roman punishment for a unit that had misbehaved. Every 10th solider was selected by lot and his nine lucky comrades would then kill him. They wouldn't think of using the word (as we would) to describe a unit that had been severely mauled in battle.

What's unfortunate for those of us who enjoy the nuances of language is that (according to a UNC linguistics prof I know who is a closet Duke fan) once a word becomes commonly used in a certain way (even if it's wrong) the definition
changes to reflect popular usage. Hence you'll find a more lax definition of "decimate" in most dictionaries. A nasty example of this is the non-word "irregardless" which I am assured now really is a word, because enough people use it, and
most dictionaries include it. Argh.

One of the best high school courses I took was etymology...can't believe many schools offered that. Provided the best evidence of why one might want to take a year of Latin (unless of course you want to become a priest, which I did not).

Indoor66

02-03-2013, 04:30 PM

Blue in the Face

02-03-2013, 04:42 PM

It wasn't exactly clear to me as to who posted the receipt. The woman who served to table was the one fired, but in the early stages of the story it was reported that someone else did the posting. If that's the case the wrong person was fired.
No, they fired the woman who posted the receipt, not the one who waited on the table.

Jarhead

02-03-2013, 05:07 PM

No, they fired the woman who posted the receipt, not the one who waited on the table.

Thank you. When I first heard about this on TV news the story was that the waitress who served the pastor was fired. Thanks, again.

-jk

02-03-2013, 07:15 PM

I learned far more about English, French and Spanish grammer and syntax in my three years of Latin then anywhere else. Those years also provided a strong foundation for my understanding of words and development of my vocabulary. I highly recommend Latin for all.

Alas, spelling still remains a challenge for the English speaking - and writing - peoples.

-jk

Indoor66

02-03-2013, 07:54 PM

Alas, spelling still remains a challenge for the English speaking - and writing - peoples.

-jk

I never could spell - or type - as most of my posts reveal. :cool:

cf-62

02-04-2013, 08:13 AM

I recently read an article where the writer suggested that "kids today have no concept of security" in a department meeting, only to have "the kids" he was referring to completely not understand that he was talking about their constant posting of private details of their lives - and their friends' lives - and their co-workers' lives, including items about work - on their facebook and twitter accounts.

While there are several facts that are interesting here, the most interesting to me is the complete lack of shock and/or disdain for the other waitress to post a picture of a receipt that she had absolutely nothing to do with on the internet. She wasn't the waitress that served the table. She wasn't an assistant manager at the restaurant, and she had nothing to do with the customer. The only reason she had for making this private altercation public was to experience her 15 minutes, internet style.

She didn't just deserve to be fired - she HAS to be fired. Applebee's must act in the interest of its customers' privacy and well being.

But we're so insensitive to privacy and security these days that many are willing to just call it a "lack of judgment" on the part of the waitress. It is a lack of judgment, but one that has egregious consequences.

Having gone to 2 high schools on 2 continents, I love facebook for connecting me to old friends, but social media in general has destroyed the reporting and gathering of news. Watching the Indiana - Michigan game Saturday night, the halftime report included several "famous" tweets - really, who gives a care?

It's imperative that any time some iReport fame chaser does something like post ANY private information about somebody else, that they pay consequences. I look forward to the day that somebody is sued - and loses money - for doing something inane like this.

JasonEvans

02-04-2013, 10:04 AM

The only reason she had for making this private altercation public was to experience her 15 minutes, internet style.

I disagree, my old friend. I think she posted it because she saw something that others might take an interest in and she wanted to share it. I don't think she was looking for fame at all. She had to know that if it went viral and she became "famous" then she would get in trouble for posting a customer receipt. Much like people who post funny pictures or tell amusing stories about the strange person they ran into that day, this was just someone sharing an out-of-the-ordinary moment in their life. This is what social media is all about. It is not about becoming "famous" for these moments.

I love facebook for connecting me to old friends, but social media in general has destroyed the reporting and gathering of news. Watching the Indiana - Michigan game Saturday night, the halftime report included several "famous" tweets - really, who gives a care?

Again, I disagree. Tweets are a fast and efficient way of getting comments and thoughts on something of interest from a wide variety of sources. The same way many of us call friends during a game or post to the DBR to share our views with others, the network was allowing all of us to share in the thoughts of some famous people watching the game. "It is halftime, lets see what Lebron James, Phil Jackson, Ben Affleck, Joe Biden, and Steve Carrell thought of the first half." Yes, it may seem sorta silly, but it allows the viewers to connect with a lot more people and get a lot more varied views of the game.

If no one "gave a care" then Twitter would not be the huge entity that it is.

-Jason "no one gonna agree or disagree with me that the restaurant/manager played this all wrong because the 18% tip was mandatory and part of the bill, the same way a dessert or drink would be?" Evans

gus

02-04-2013, 10:39 AM

davekay1971

02-04-2013, 10:59 AM

It's not just kids. My mother over the weekend posted on my cousin's untrestricted facebook wall that she'll be visiting his city for two weeks and gave the dates. I haven't pointed out to her yet that she just advertised to the internet that her house will be unoccupied..

We should probably have a whole new thread on social media and all the related topics of etiquette, social interaction, social structure, acceptable behavior, job-related issues, etc.

And you're absolutely right, that young people aren't the only ones who don't seem to get the limits. My mother-in-law posted pics on my wall of me nicely, ahem, lubricated at a New Year's Eve party at her house two years ago. Several coworkers and even a few (select) patients/friends were on my facebook page. I had to un-tag myself and ask her to not do that. I said "were" on my facebook page because I've since gotten off facebook. I came to really dislike the social media format and prefer to keep contact with people I actually want to stay in contact with the old fashioned way.

Young people are a different issue entirely, and I think we're going to see a real generational shift in what is considered appropriate vs. inappropriate conduct in the public eye. My best point of reference is my 18 year old sister-in-law, who lives on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram...along with all of her friends and peers. What is said and publicized on those forums among that generation is ridiculous. They certainly don't seem to have any understanding of protection of their own privacy, or anyone else's.

As a lawyer once said, if you don't want to see it in court one day, don't text it and don't write it in email. The same obviously applies to social media.

Jarhead

02-04-2013, 11:16 AM

Has it been cleared up yet? Was it the waitress who served the pastor, or the waitress who posted the receipt that got fired? I'm confused a little bit from staying up so late to watch Elementary last night, but the pastor is the real culprit in all of this, as far as I am concerned. I even suspect her tithe of 10% is a falsehood.http://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/65.gif

tommy

02-04-2013, 12:11 PM

I think the pastor was way out of line here as well. She got caught being cheap, and nasty to boot.

But be that as it may, I don't like anyone telling me how much I have to tip either. It makes it not a tip, which by its nature, is voluntary. After all, what if the service for the part of 8 is simply terrible. Slow, orders all wrong, discourteous, etc. Why should the customer not have the right to adjust the tip accordingly?

But if the restaurant is going to make it mandatory, then I can think of two other ways to present it so customers don't have to feel like the restaurant is deciding how much the tip is. One would be to call it a "service charge" or something like that instead of a gratuity. And then the service charge just goes to the server. Kind of like "shipping and handling."

Or they could have alternative pricing. If it's in a party of eight or more, the price of a hamburger isn't $10, it's $11.80. Just build it into the price of the items purchased. I know that would mess things up tax-wise, and it would look ugly to have two columns on the menu for each item -- regular price and large party price, but if you want to make it mandatory, that's another way to do it.

moonpie23

02-04-2013, 04:50 PM

sorry to be so gauche and naive here, but, isn't "tipping" supposed to be for EXCELLENT service above and beyond the norm?

snowdenscold

02-04-2013, 05:02 PM

sorry to be so gauche and naive here, but, isn't "tipping" supposed to be for EXCELLENT service above and beyond the norm?

Probably originally, but clearly it's evolved past that in restaurants nowadays.

gus

02-04-2013, 06:25 PM

sorry to be so gauche and naive here, but, isn't "tipping" supposed to be for EXCELLENT service above and beyond the norm?

Not in restaurants it's not. It forms a large portion of servers' pay, as restaurants are able to pay them well below normal minimum wage. (the federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour, but only $2.13/hour for "tipped employees").

ncexnyc

02-04-2013, 06:38 PM

Is it just me, or does anyone else have flashbacks to the scene in, "Reservior Dogs", where they are arguing about tips?:D

tommy

02-04-2013, 07:04 PM

Not in restaurants it's not. It forms a large portion of servers' pay, as restaurants are able to pay them well below normal minimum wage. (the federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour, but only $2.13/hour for "tipped employees").

But if it's mandatory, then isn't it actually part of the cost of the meal? And if so, shouldn't the prices of the items on the menu reflect their true cost -- that is, what the customer can expect the bottom line of the bill (excluding tax) to be? Seems quite disingenuous to say on the menu "this plate of pasta costs $12" but when the bill comes, "we're charging you $14.50 for it, and you don't have a choice in that add-on. Sorry."

gus

02-04-2013, 07:18 PM

But if it's mandatory, then isn't it actually part of the cost of the meal? And if so, shouldn't the prices of the items on the menu reflect their true cost -- that is, what the customer can expect the bottom line of the bill (excluding tax) to be? Seems quite disingenuous to say on the menu "this plate of pasta costs $12" but when the bill comes, "we're charging you $14.50 for it, and you don't have a choice in that add-on. Sorry."

Sure. That's how it's done in a lot of countries. I would also prefer that prices at stores include sales tax too, or that cell phone plans would be advertised with all the taxes and fees layered in, so you'd know what you're actually signing up for.

But that's not how it's done in the US.

cf-62

02-04-2013, 10:16 PM

I disagree, my old friend. I think she posted it because she saw something that others might take an interest in and she wanted to share it. I don't think she was looking for fame at all. She had to know that if it went viral and she became "famous" then she would get in trouble for posting a customer receipt. Much like people who post funny pictures or tell amusing stories about the strange person they ran into that day, this was just someone sharing an out-of-the-ordinary moment in their life. This is what social media is all about. It is not about becoming "famous" for these moments.

See, this is the point I'm making. She's missing a fundamental switch in her head that says "this is a privacy issue, and it's not a good idea to post this on the internet." As others have mentioned in the thread, those that think of the internet as "whatever is on facebook" seem to lack this fundamental understanding of a connection to "the real world" and common sense when it comes to social information.

It's like in their head is a slogan "What happens on Facebook, stays on Facebook."

cf-62

02-04-2013, 10:20 PM

-Jason "no one gonna agree or disagree with me that the restaurant/manager played this all wrong because the 18% tip was mandatory and part of the bill, the same way a dessert or drink would be?" Evans

It's a moot point. It's automatically added by the system. Here's something I bet many of you didn't know. If you don't sign your CC receipt at the restaurant, the charge will still go through. The only thing you won't be charged for is the tip YOU WRITE IN.

Once the pastor gave her card -- the system will charge it for the full amount in the system, which includes the mandatory tip. She doesn't get to refuse it, and she doesn't have to sign her charge slip. IT WILL GET CHARGED.

aimo

02-05-2013, 10:17 AM

What's unfortunate for those of us who enjoy the nuances of language is that (according to a UNC linguistics prof I know who is a closet Duke fan) once a word becomes commonly used in a certain way (even if it's wrong) the definition
changes to reflect popular usage. Hence you'll find a more lax definition of "decimate" in most dictionaries. A nasty example of this is the non-word "irregardless" which I am assured now really is a word, because enough people use it, and
most dictionaries include it. Argh.

Like IRONICAL and ORIENTATE?

But regarding the incident, I did a stint in waitressing, and you learn very quickly the types who will not tip, regardless of how well you served them. I think this woman is a cheapskate and simply thought using her title would give her a pass, which is disgusting.

As an extra added note, I have a good friend who, a while back, waited tables at a restaurant in SanFran. It must have been more of a diner-type restaurant b/c they did NOT have the policy of adding tip automatically for large parties. My friend ended up waiting on Jesse Jackson and his entourage, at least a dozen people. THEY TOTALLY STIFFED HER! After running her ragged. I should also add that in my experience the ones that are the highest in maintenance are the ones least likely to tip.

cato

02-05-2013, 12:15 PM

But if it's mandatory, then isn't it actually part of the cost of the meal? And if so, shouldn't the prices of the items on the menu reflect their true cost -- that is, what the customer can expect the bottom line of the bill (excluding tax) to be? Seems quite disingenuous to say on the menu "this plate of pasta costs $12" but when the bill comes, "we're charging you $14.50 for it, and you don't have a choice in that add-on. Sorry."

Funny how that works, isn't it? I'm impressed, actaully, by how the restaurant industry has managed to pass such a large share of their employment costs onto the customer base without most people truly realizing it.

gus

02-05-2013, 12:59 PM

What's unfortunate for those of us who enjoy the nuances of language is that (according to a UNC linguistics prof I know who is a closet Duke fan) once a word becomes commonly used in a certain way (even if it's wrong) the definition
changes to reflect popular usage. Hence you'll find a more lax definition of "decimate" in most dictionaries. A nasty example of this is the non-word "irregardless" which I am assured now really is a word, because enough people use it, and
most dictionaries include it. Argh.

One of the best high school courses I took was etymology...can't believe many schools offered that. Provided the best evidence of why one might want to take a year of Latin (unless of course you want to become a priest, which I did not).

The "irregardless" ship sailed a long time ago. It's been recorded in print as early as 1795. I don't like to use it, but I don't really fight it either.

I find myself between the two extremes of "prescriptivist" vs "descriptivism" battle. In no man's land, I suppose, with shells flying over my head. Lines like "commonly used in a certain way (even if it's wrong)" are, to me, quite illogical. What is language, if not a means of communication? If "awful" and "awesome" can have nearly identical etymologies and completely different meanings, which one is being used "correctly"? As long as both are well understood, who really cares? But at the same time, I'm irritated by the misuse of words like "literally".

But "decimate"? I don't know anyone except people who are deliberately obstinate and curmudgeonly as an effected trait who insist that can only mean "kill every tenth person".

Duvall

02-05-2013, 01:05 PM

allenmurray

02-05-2013, 03:11 PM

Funny how that works, isn't it? I'm impressed, actaully, by how the restaurant industry has managed to pass such a large share of their employment costs onto the customer base without most people truly realizing it.

Most of us do realize it, and act accordingly

budwom

02-05-2013, 03:45 PM

Like IRONICAL and ORIENTATE?

But regarding the incident, I did a stint in waitressing, and you learn very quickly the types who will not tip, regardless of how well you served them. I think this woman is a cheapskate and simply thought using her title would give her a pass, which is disgusting.

As an extra added note, I have a good friend who, a while back, waited tables at a restaurant in SanFran. It must have been more of a diner-type restaurant b/c they did NOT have the policy of adding tip automatically for large parties. My friend ended up waiting on Jesse Jackson and his entourage, at least a dozen people. THEY TOTALLY STIFFED HER! After running her ragged. I should also add that in my experience the ones that are the highest in maintenance are the ones least likely to tip.

I've done a stint in the waiting trade, and agree completely. Some people are just cheap and look for any excuse to stiff the waiter.

A series of local incidents here in Vermont became an international story when a number of restaurants, who see a lot of Canadian business, starting arbitrarily (and without posted notice) adding tips to bills of persons they
assumed to be Canadians. Much outrage, defensiveness, and backpedalling ensued. It's a complicated and delicate issue because, among other things:

1) In reality the servers hit not all Canadians with the charge, but specifically French Canadians, because they heard the accent. The English Canadians have a far less detectable accent, so the action was basically exclusively for the French.

2) Two restaurants said they did it because they were sick of their people getting screwed on trips....one said they were sure it was because people don't tip in Canada.

3) People DO tip in Canada...it's not like France with service compris, etc...

4) Despite protestations to the contrary , it really is true that many French Canadians tip like crap in Vermont. I wish it weren't true, but it is. Great visitors, fine people, but dozens of restaurants I know of recognize this problem.

Some restaurants with a lot of Canadian business have tried putting gentle reminders on the menu about tipping protocol, but most find it tacky, don't do it, and hope it's not necessary.

davekay1971

02-05-2013, 06:20 PM

Most of us do realize it, and act accordingly

Besides, the "passing the cost along" issue is a moot point. Restaurants operate on a relatively slim profit margin due to it being a very, very competitive industry (according to Deloitte-Touche, in 2010, the average profit margin for restaurants ranged from 1.5% to 3.5%, depending mostly on the average check size). It's not like the restaurant owner is taking the employee wages that are covered by the tip and taking it home as profit. The consumer paying the wage costs via tip allows the restaurant owners to charge comparatively less for the food and drink items. If tipping was truly optional, or non-existent, and owners had to pay a fully competitive cost for server wages, the prices of the food and drinks would elevate accordingly (or restaurants would operate with fewer staff...and that would suck).

tommy

02-05-2013, 06:31 PM

Besides, the "passing the cost along" issue is a moot point. Restaurants operate on a relatively slim profit margin due to it being a very, very competitive industry (according to Deloitte-Touche, in 2010, the average profit margin for restaurants ranged from 1.5% to 3.5%, depending mostly on the average check size). It's not like the restaurant owner is taking the employee wages that are covered by the tip and taking it home as profit. The consumer paying the wage costs via tip allows the restaurant owners to charge comparatively less for the food and drink items. If tipping was truly optional, or non-existent, and owners had to pay a fully competitive cost for server wages, the prices of the food and drinks would elevate accordingly (or restaurants would operate with fewer staff...and that would suck).

But at least it would be more honest. If the "tip" is mandatory, rather than optional, then the prices of the food and drinks have in fact been elevated by that 15 or 18 or 20% or whatever the mandatory amount is. If the prices had to be raised in the absence of tipping, then at least the customers would know what the true price of the meal was going to be prior to ordering it, which they should be entitled to know. Seems to me better for the consumer for the restaurant to be up front about what the bill is going to be rather than to lowball it with the menu price, only to add the mandatory amount on at the end, when it's too late for the customer to say no and walk out.

And doing it that way might be better for the waiter/waitress too -- that way their pay is locked in, rather than being at the whims of ornery customers who might be apt to stiff them despite their hard work.

Indoor66

02-05-2013, 06:41 PM

And doing it that way might be better for the waiter/waitress too -- that way their pay is locked in, rather than being at the whims of ornery customers who might be apt to stiff them despite their hard work.

And we could all watch the quality of waitstaff tumble as the wage scale was lower than the tip scale - in order for the restaurants to remain competitive.

Wander

02-05-2013, 07:53 PM

weezie

02-05-2013, 09:20 PM

This is remarkable. Many pages due to a cheapskate tipper at Applebee's?
An oxymoron in fact.
Oy.

duke74

02-05-2013, 11:08 PM

davekay1971

02-05-2013, 11:53 PM

But at least it would be more honest. If the "tip" is mandatory, rather than optional, then the prices of the food and drinks have in fact been elevated by that 15 or 18 or 20% or whatever the mandatory amount is. If the prices had to be raised in the absence of tipping, then at least the customers would know what the true price of the meal was going to be prior to ordering it, which they should be entitled to know. Seems to me better for the consumer for the restaurant to be up front about what the bill is going to be rather than to lowball it with the menu price, only to add the mandatory amount on at the end, when it's too late for the customer to say no and walk out.

And doing it that way might be better for the waiter/waitress too -- that way their pay is locked in, rather than being at the whims of ornery customers who might be apt to stiff them despite their hard work.

Ah, but since some of the tips are in cash, some of that pay for the waiter/waitress is...ah, possibly...tax free. So there's that, which the waiters like, of course.

As for honest pricing, since most people walk into the restaurant expecting to pay a 15-20% tip, I think it's on the customer to include that into their mental calculation of the cost of the meal. If I'm looking at the prices on the menu before I go to the restaurant or walk in, and the entrees are in the $20 range, I'm automatically thinking it's about $25 for entrees once I include tax and tip...meaning $50 for me and my wife for entrees, not $40.

Then you add in another $20 for the appetizer and salad, and, if wife's feeling frisky, another $30-40 for her tasty martinis. Man, does that add up fast! But, hey, she's looking good in the dress and heels, so what the heck... Granted, since we have a 4 month old at home, we'll probably be passing out shortly after the baby does, so all that martini money will be gone to waste. Speaking of, Tommy, I hope you got your tabletop fixed in time!

Lord Ash

02-06-2013, 07:06 AM

Dave, that went from analytical post to flow-of-consciousness awful quick:)

davekay1971

02-06-2013, 08:56 AM

Dave, that went from analytical post to flow-of-consciousness awful quick:)

Sometimes the margin between those two is razor-thin.

Acymetric

02-06-2013, 05:20 PM

It's a moot point. It's automatically added by the system. Here's something I bet many of you didn't know. If you don't sign your CC receipt at the restaurant, the charge will still go through. The only thing you won't be charged for is the tip YOU WRITE IN.

Once the pastor gave her card -- the system will charge it for the full amount in the system, which includes the mandatory tip. She doesn't get to refuse it, and she doesn't have to sign her charge slip. IT WILL GET CHARGED.

It is added automatically unless you split the check among each of the attendees but then have one person pay anyway in an (apparently successful) attempt to circumvent the policy.

throatybeard

02-06-2013, 08:16 PM

*activates Beardsignal, waits on rooftop*

I appreciate the shout-out, but I've stopped arguing this stuff on the internet, because no one listens to me. It's a little better here than it is at BeggingToAntagonize, but I'm a tired man.

As an aside, even as a raging descriptivist,* I have a few prescriptive bugaboos myself. The main one, the one that makes me scream at the TV when House, MD is on, is the eroding distinction between hypothesis and theory. This has major implications for how we talk about Science.

Decimate isn't very irritating, using that standard. Unless the other nine guys on the team are shooting the lame Ryan Kelly. Whatever. I don't care.

If you're interested in this sort of thing, subscribe to forty emails a day from the ADS listserv at UGA.

* - Note that the board software has a spelling problem with this word, for no reason.

throatybeard

02-06-2013, 08:19 PM

Ah, but since some of the tips are in cash, some of that pay for the waiter/waitress is...ah, possibly...tax free. So there's that, which the waiters like, of course.

As for honest pricing, since most people walk into the restaurant expecting to pay a 15-20% tip, I think it's on the customer to include that into their mental calculation of the cost of the meal. If I'm looking at the prices on the menu before I go to the restaurant or walk in, and the entrees are in the $20 range, I'm automatically thinking it's about $25 for entrees once I include tax and tip...meaning $50 for me and my wife for entrees, not $40.

Then you add in another $20 for the appetizer and salad, and, if wife's feeling frisky, another $30-40 for her tasty martinis. Man, does that add up fast! But, hey, she's looking good in the dress and heels, so what the heck... Granted, since we have a 4 month old at home, we'll probably be passing out shortly after the baby does, so all that martini money will be gone to waste. Speaking of, Tommy, I hope you got your tabletop fixed in time!

Dude, you need to find an establishment, like I have, where the employees love you and ring that stuff up as a rail gin.

I've bolded the most incisive part of your post.

TampaDuke

02-06-2013, 11:13 PM

Not in restaurants it's not. It forms a large portion of servers' pay, as restaurants are able to pay them well below normal minimum wage. (the federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour, but only $2.13/hour for "tipped employees").

However, by law the restaurant has to make up the difference between federal minimum wage and the server's pay if the $2.13 per hour plus tips does not at least average out to equal the minimum wage each week. In this scenario, if the server were continuously stiffed on bills in an amount sufficient to drop average weekly earnings below $7.25 per hour, it's the restaurant that has to pay to make up the difference. That said, I'm sure most servers would be unhappy earning only minimum wage.

CDu

02-07-2013, 03:29 PM

sorry to be so gauche and naive here, but, isn't "tipping" supposed to be for EXCELLENT service above and beyond the norm?

Unfortunately, I fear that many people share this misconception. Restaurants don't typically pay their waitstaff ($2.13/hour, which gets completely nullified with taxes). The service tip is essentially the waiter's only form of pay for their work at a restaurant. So people who don't tip are essentially saying the waiter doesn't deserve to be paid for their efforts.

In Europe, waiters' salaries are provided by the restaurant, and as such tipping is truly a gratuity for service above and beyond the norm. But aside from just a handful of places in the US, that's not how it works here.

15% is, in my opinion, the bare minimum appropriate tip. That's saying that the waiter did nothing noteworthy at all to improve the dining experience. If one is not interested in paying at least 15% tip for a meal, then they should go to a fast-food restaurant or a restaurant that doesn't have servers.

CDu

02-07-2013, 03:31 PM

However, by law the restaurant has to make up the difference between federal minimum wage and the server's pay if the $2.13 per hour plus tips does not at least average out to equal the minimum wage each week. In this scenario, if the server were continuously stiffed on bills in an amount sufficient to drop average weekly earnings below $7.25 per hour, it's the restaurant that has to pay to make up the difference. That said, I'm sure most servers would be unhappy earning only minimum wage.

Yeah, I suspect you won't find too many capable waiters if their pay is whittled to only $7.25 per hour.

sporthenry

02-09-2013, 02:01 AM

http://imgur.com/gallery/637i9Tv

Apparently, this is a letter from the fired waitress. The quote that I found myself agreeing with most was

Obviously the person who wrote this note wanted it to be seen by someone. It's strange that now that the audience is wider than just the server, the person is ashamed.

Jim3k

02-09-2013, 02:24 AM

I hope she wrote that post herself. She writes as well as any college graduate. Beyond that, she has made a public case for herself and her fellow servers that needs to be read by all restaurant-goers.

She needs a better-paying job if she wants to pay for college. When one door closes, hopefully another will open.

JasonEvans

02-09-2013, 12:26 PM

snowdenscold

02-09-2013, 08:48 PM

bjornolf

02-09-2013, 09:54 PM

I was at Longhorn tonight, and at the bottom of the menu the fine print said:

"A 18% gratuity will be added to parties of 8 or more for your convenience. If you believe this amount should be increased or decreased, please notify your server."

Thought that was interesting.

Most restaurants have something to that effect. I find the 18% a little annoying myself. I'm usually a pretty decent tipper, and I will often give 20% or even 25% for a really good experience. However, I almost never add to the tip when the 18% is forced upon me. So, that 18% usually costs the wait staff a few percentage points in my case.

snowdenscold

02-10-2013, 02:17 PM

I was at Longhorn tonight, and at the bottom of the menu the fine print said:

"A 18% gratuity will be added to parties of 8 or more for your convenience. If you believe this amount should be increased or decreased, please notify your server."

Thought that was interesting.

Most restaurants have something to that effect.

Oh really? This was the first time I've seen the latter part explicitly printed out. Or maybe I just haven't been looking until this recent Applebee's incident.

cf-62

02-10-2013, 11:05 PM

If I had a restaurant, I would hire her on the spot. She seems to have the attitude and work ethic of someone who will succeed greatly in life.

I also wonder, is there any way she has a chance at a wrongful termination lawsuit? She says she did nothing to violate the employee handbook -- though I suppose they could claim she embarrassed the establishment. Ahhh, nevermind.

-Jason "that line about not wanting a large audience for the pastor's note was perfect and is totally indefensible" Evans

A) No way she wrote it. It's a fake
B) BS on not violating company policy. I know plenty of individuals let go from retail / wait staff positions for MUCH LESS. She definitely harmed the company
C) We've already discussed the whole fantasy world that social media seems to promote in its use

tommy

02-11-2013, 02:20 AM

I also wonder, is there any way she has a chance at a wrongful termination lawsuit? She says she did nothing to violate the employee handbook -- though I suppose they could claim she embarrassed the establishment. Ahhh, nevermind.

Yeah, very unlikely. She's almost certainly an at-will employee, so violating the employee handbook is not a prerequisite to getting rid of her. As I think I might've mentioned in an earlier post on this thread, were she to consult a good employment attorney, he or she would likely be declining to represent her unless -- big unless here -- she provided something additional that may have motivated the firing. Things such as she had been making noises about filing a sexual harassment lawsuit against a manager, or she was newly involved in trying to form a union, or those sorts of things. With the idea being, of course, that if she could prove that firing her over this thing with the pastor was a convenient cover for the real reason they fired her -- like the things I mentioned -- then the case would get interesting.

alteran

02-11-2013, 04:29 PM

I appreciate the shout-out, but I've stopped arguing this stuff on the internet, because no one listens to me. It's a little better here than it is at BeggingToAntagonize, but I'm a tired man.

As an aside, even as a raging descriptivist,* I have a few prescriptive bugaboos myself. The main one, the one that makes me scream at the TV when House, MD is on, is the eroding distinction between hypothesis and theory. This has major implications for how we talk about Science.

Decimate isn't very irritating, using that standard. Unless the other nine guys on the team are shooting the lame Ryan Kelly. Whatever. I don't care.

If you're interested in this sort of thing, subscribe to forty emails a day from the ADS listserv at UGA.

* - Note that the board software has a spelling problem with this word, for no reason.

This talk of internecine language disputes reminds me of this Onion piece (http://www.theonion.com/articles/4-copy-editors-killed-in-ongoing-ap-style-chicago,30806/) awhile back.

Jim3k

03-06-2013, 04:00 PM

bjornolf

03-07-2013, 09:49 PM

at Yahoo (http://shine.yahoo.com/work-money/what-kind-of-person-tips-10-dollars-for-85-pizzas--173851199.html). Seems a pizza guy delivered 85 pizzas and got a $10 tip for a $1450 order.

The commentary is about what you'd expect, but way too extensive to report on.

Man, where did that guy live? That's over $17 per pizza. Here, a Papa John's large with 3 toppings is $13. I would think he'd get some kind of bulk discount, or order the special or something. Man.

Jarhead

03-07-2013, 10:54 PM

JasonEvans

03-08-2013, 02:02 PM

Man, where did that guy live? That's over $17 per pizza. Here, a Papa John's large with 3 toppings is $13. I would think he'd get some kind of bulk discount, or order the special or something. Man.

I would think it is very possible on an order that large that there was a steep delivery charge included. It is possible, right or wrong, that the person purchasing the pizzas felt that the tip was built in to the delivery charge. Heck, the pizza place might have even told him that and the $10 was an added bonus. The person ordering the pizzas might be going above and beyond with the $10 tip for all we know.

If someone called my restaurant and wanted 85 pizzas ordered, you can bet we would discuss how many drivers it would take and what an appropriate delivery charge would be for such an order. And I would probably talk to my drivers about how the delivery charge would be shared with them.

-Jason "I could easily see someone faking all this" Evans

Wander

03-08-2013, 02:51 PM

-Jason "I could easily see someone faking all this" Evans

This happened not too long ago. An Occupy Wall Street supporter posted an image online that claimed to show their banker boss leaving a 1% tip at a restaurant (referencing that they were part of the "1 percent") with a note on the receipt to the waitress that said "Get a real job!" HuffingtonPost even picked it up and did an article on it. Turned out that the guy just completely made the whole thing up.

Jim3k

03-08-2013, 03:33 PM

If someone called my restaurant and wanted 85 pizzas ordered, you can bet we would discuss how many drivers it would take and what an appropriate delivery charge would be for such an order. And I would probably talk to my drivers about how the delivery charge would be shared with them.

-Jason "I could easily see someone faking all this" Evans

I agree and add that it would require an advance order and take several kitchens to accommodate it unless baked at a large central kitchen. (A chain would be the best bet.) Plus, with an order that large it seems likely that the restaurant would both offer a quantity discount and want an advance payment. With the advance payment there would also be a discussion of delivery costs, timeliness of delivery and gratuity. Even though $17 seems high, in my area a large combination easily runs in that range or more. Check out the prices from this takeout specialty joint. (http://www.allmenus.com/ca/central-contra-costa/61258-strictly-to-go-pizza/menu/) Usually good pizza, too.

When I read the Yahoo story these things crossed my mind. Plus, I thought it odd that the actual restaurant wasn't named nor the city where this occurred; not even the event involved (must have been pretty big). But I figured the story was the starting place and fit this thread so I linked it.

If there was more to it, it seems natural that there would be a follow-up. If anyone sees a follow-up, please post it.

blazindw

03-08-2013, 04:32 PM

I would think it is very possible on an order that large that there was a steep delivery charge included. It is possible, right or wrong, that the person purchasing the pizzas felt that the tip was built in to the delivery charge. Heck, the pizza place might have even told him that and the $10 was an added bonus. The person ordering the pizzas might be going above and beyond with the $10 tip for all we know.

If someone called my restaurant and wanted 85 pizzas ordered, you can bet we would discuss how many drivers it would take and what an appropriate delivery charge would be for such an order. And I would probably talk to my drivers about how the delivery charge would be shared with them.

-Jason "I could easily see someone faking all this" Evans

As someone whose office orders company pizza a lot (40+ at times), the tip is definitely not included. A delivery charge is automatically placed on every order from the major pizza chains (Dominos, Pizza Hut, Papa John's), but the tip is not. The delivery charge is not something "agreed upon," it's usually the same as if we ordered 1 pizza.

Our standard is to tip 15-20% on those huge orders, even though in most cases, we have to send people downstairs to actually bring the pizza up to the office. And, it's never more than 1 driver. A lot of them have SUVs so that if there's a big order they can pack it in there.

bjornolf

03-09-2013, 09:56 AM

I would think it is very possible on an order that large that there was a steep delivery charge included. It is possible, right or wrong, that the person purchasing the pizzas felt that the tip was built in to the delivery charge. Heck, the pizza place might have even told him that and the $10 was an added bonus. The person ordering the pizzas might be going above and beyond with the $10 tip for all we know.

If someone called my restaurant and wanted 85 pizzas ordered, you can bet we would discuss how many drivers it would take and what an appropriate delivery charge would be for such an order. And I would probably talk to my drivers about how the delivery charge would be shared with them.

-Jason "I could easily see someone faking all this" Evans

Maybe they did, but I've talked to several of the restaurants in my area over the last few years (pizza, chinese, subs, etc.). Every single one admitted to me that the delivery charge does NOT go to the drivers. At least not directly. I'm sure it helps pay their wages.

CDu

03-11-2013, 10:44 PM

As someone whose office orders company pizza a lot (40+ at times), the tip is definitely not included. A delivery charge is automatically placed on every order from the major pizza chains (Dominos, Pizza Hut, Papa John's), but the tip is not. The delivery charge is not something "agreed upon," it's usually the same as if we ordered 1 pizza.

Our standard is to tip 15-20% on those huge orders, even though in most cases, we have to send people downstairs to actually bring the pizza up to the office. And, it's never more than 1 driver. A lot of them have SUVs so that if there's a big order they can pack it in there.

Maybe they did, but I've talked to several of the restaurants in my area over the last few years (pizza, chinese, subs, etc.). Every single one admitted to me that the delivery charge does NOT go to the drivers. At least not directly. I'm sure it helps pay their wages.

When I worked as a pizza delivery guy (best summer job ever, by the way), part of the delivery charge was to cover gas for the drivers. We got a nominal fee per-delivery from the restaurant (when I did it, it was like $0.75 per address). So the delivery charge was to cover that fee (not saying that all of the charge went to the drivers, but some definitely did). It was most certainly NOT intended to be the tip.

This is one area in which the delivery industry differs from regular restaurant dining. The "waiters" in the delivery industry must pay for gas and car maintenance. Most pizza restaurants are nice enough to acknowledge this, and factor it in to the workers' pay. They then pass the fee on to the consumer as a convenience fee (i.e., you save time and gas moneyy by not having to leave your house to get served). People should reasonably expect to pay for both the convenience AND the service.

Mal

03-12-2013, 01:21 PM

They then pass the fee on to the consumer as a convenience fee (i.e., you save time and gas moneyy by not having to leave your house to get served). People should reasonably expect to pay for both the convenience AND the service.

This is a good point. The general delivery fee concept is for the car and the fact I don't have to leave the couch, so tipping is mandatory on the service. That said, however, for me, the service part of it is different from and significantly less than what a server in the physical restaurant does. A delivery person's actual interaction with me, the customer, lasts around 30 seconds and requires no specific need-filling; they're essentially expeditors who roam a lot further from the kitchen. So it doesn't necessarily warrant a specific percentage tip based on the gross amount of the bill, 10, 20, whatever. I usually tip a delivery person three or four bucks, or a bit more if it's a particularly large order or it's probably the last run of the night or we're on the outer edge of the delivery area. Generally speaking, though, a $12 order and a $25 dollar order require no additional work out of the deliverer - perhaps they have to use two hands instead of one to carry a second bag, or they need to pull two pizza boxes out of the sleeve instead of one. I tip, then, based on the overall work, rather than based on the size of the bill.

So, I guess what I'm saying is I can understand perhaps how we ended up with the low tip in Jim3K's cite, although clearly a delivery with that many pies is going to take multiple trips to and from the kitchen on the front end, multiple trips to and from the vehicle on the delivery end, and probably involve more than one person, at least at the kitchen. The driver can't make multiple stops on this run, either, and needs to go back to the restaurant to fill more orders, whereas when he/she leaves my house after leaving one or two pies, he/she hits another couple houses before needing to return to home base. So, obviously something more is warranted. Not sure how much, I guess, but definitely not the 15-20% blazin's talking about above. $250+ for almost any order seems grossly excessive, unless we think the delivery person had to sacrifice the rest of their evening for the one order. If this took them the time and effort it would normally have taken to make 15 deliveries (and I doubt it would, although there was probably lost opportunity with the ovens tied up for awhile on the one giant order), we'd still be talking $75 if their average was $5/house.

DukieInKansas

03-12-2013, 01:53 PM

This is a good point. The general delivery fee concept is for the car and the fact I don't have to leave the couch, so tipping is mandatory on the service. That said, however, for me, the service part of it is different from and significantly less than what a server in the physical restaurant does. A delivery person's actual interaction with me, the customer, lasts around 30 seconds and requires no specific need-filling; they're essentially expeditors who roam a lot further from the kitchen. So it doesn't necessarily warrant a specific percentage tip based on the gross amount of the bill, 10, 20, whatever. I usually tip a delivery person three or four bucks, or a bit more if it's a particularly large order or it's probably the last run of the night or we're on the outer edge of the delivery area. Generally speaking, though, a $12 order and a $25 dollar order require no additional work out of the deliverer - perhaps they have to use two hands instead of one to carry a second bag, or they need to pull two pizza boxes out of the sleeve instead of one. I tip, then, based on the overall work, rather than based on the size of the bill.

So, I guess what I'm saying is I can understand perhaps how we ended up with the low tip in Jim3K's cite, although clearly a delivery with that many pies is going to take multiple trips to and from the kitchen on the front end, multiple trips to and from the vehicle on the delivery end, and probably involve more than one person, at least at the kitchen. The driver can't make multiple stops on this run, either, and needs to go back to the restaurant to fill more orders, whereas when he/she leaves my house after leaving one or two pies, he/she hits another couple houses before needing to return to home base. So, obviously something more is warranted. Not sure how much, I guess, but definitely not the 15-20% blazin's talking about above. $250+ for almost any order seems grossly excessive, unless we think the delivery person had to sacrifice the rest of their evening for the one order. If this took them the time and effort it would normally have taken to make 15 deliveries (and I doubt it would, although there was probably lost opportunity with the ovens tied up for awhile on the one giant order), we'd still be talking $75 if their average was $5/house.

I used to tip a buck or two when I had pizza delivered, many years ago. Then someone pointed out that the delivery person should be tipped as if they were a waiter. Yes, they only make one trip to your "table" but they saved you having to drive to a restaurant and wait for a table, plus you get to continue to do whatever you want/need to do in your own home. Pretty good deal to me.

Mal

03-12-2013, 03:27 PM

I used to tip a buck or two when I had pizza delivered, many years ago. Then someone pointed out that the delivery person should be tipped as if they were a waiter. Yes, they only make one trip to your "table" but they saved you having to drive to a restaurant and wait for a table, plus you get to continue to do whatever you want/need to do in your own home. Pretty good deal to me.

I guess I see them as completely different experiences. One has convenience, the other is a night out with attendant atmospherics, etc. That they both involve the same food, more or less, is immaterial to me. What about a pizza delivery chain? No one saved me from having to drive to Domino's - they don't even have seating. The waiter/waitress experience adds to the enjoyment of a meal at a restaurant, as they offer suggestions, answer questions about the menu, notice when you might want another glass of wine or your kid needs more milk, bring the food to your table plated and warm and in the order of courses, take things away when you're done, etc., etc. For that I'm happy to apply a percentage of the overall bill. When and if a delivery person does any of those things, I'll consider tipping them more. Let's put it this way: assuming both a waiter and a delivery driver are making the same base wage, I'd expect a table server to earn significantly more in tips, based on the amount of interaction and thought that has to go into their work. But if you're tipping delivery people at 20% of the bill, the same as the table server, given the fact they probably make 6 deliveries an hour whereas the waiter probably turns over 3 tables an hour, the delivery person's going to go home with a lot more money. Especially once the waiter shares their tips with the bartenders and expeditors.

CDu

03-12-2013, 04:07 PM

What about a pizza delivery chain? No one saved me from having to drive to Domino's - they don't even have seating.

They still saved you the time/effort/annoyance of having to drive to pick up the pizza (which is an option at virtually every pizza chain), even if you didn't get the ambiance or convenience of dining in the restaurant. Instead of having to pay for gas to drive somewhere, you pay someone to drive it to you. And instead of getting the convenience/atmosphere of the waiter, you get the convenience of not having to leave the house. The delivery charge covers the gas. The tip covers the convenience of not having to drive.

Don't feel that 15-20% is fair for that convenience? Then go to a restaurant.

But if you're tipping delivery people at 20% of the bill, the same as the table server, given the fact they probably make 6 deliveries an hour whereas the waiter probably turns over 3 tables an hour, the delivery person's going to go home with a lot more money. Especially once the waiter shares their tips with the bartenders and expeditors.

Most waiters have at least 3 tables an hour, and I'd say the average could be even higher. And most bills on said tables are greater than those for a pizza delivery. A 4-person table, for example, would cost at least $50 for even a mediocre chain restaurant. At a nice restaurant? We're talking $100+ easy. That's a $15-20+ dollar tip per 4-top. A 4-person pizza order (4 individual-sized, 2 mediums, or 1-2 larges) would not likely top $25-30. So you're looking at $4-6. You'd have to make 4 4-person deliveries just to match that one table at a nice restaurant (or 2 tables at a mediocre restaurant).

Having worked both as a waiter and a delivery guy, I made substantially more as a waiter. I worked harder for that money, though. That's for sure. I definitely enjoyed my experience more as a short-term delivery guy than I did as a waiter (which I also enjoyed a great deal). But if I had to do one of those for any meaningful length of time, I'd choose waiting tables every day and twice on Sunday. I think the strain on my car and the drain of daytime deliveries would get to me after a while - not to mention the paycut.

Mal

03-12-2013, 06:32 PM

Instead of having to pay for gas to drive somewhere, you pay someone to drive it to you. And instead of getting the convenience/atmosphere of the waiter, you get the convenience of not having to leave the house. The delivery charge covers the gas. The tip covers the convenience of not having to drive.

Don't feel that 15-20% is fair for that convenience? Then go to a restaurant.

But as you've explained upthread, I've already paid for that convenience. There's a delivery fee already on my bill, and I assume only a portion of it goes to the driver for gas and auto amortization. The rest is the restaurant's convenience charge to me for not having to leave my house. If they want to jack that up and see how customers balance that convenience of delivery against the relative hassle of pickup, they can do so. Many do, charging upwards of $5 or more above the menu total, and I'll still order to save 10 minutes and a car run. That this amount has been whittled down to nothing or close to it at a pizza place, by the market, is not really my concern. It's become a market expectation that, when it comes to pizza at least, the convenience is factored into the price through competition; there are enough places willing to not charge for the convenience that it's essentially become a freebie, and it's baked into the cost on the menu. No pun intended.

Most waiters have at least 3 tables an hour, and I'd say the average could be even higher. And most bills on said tables are greater than those for a pizza delivery. A 4-person table, for example, would cost at least $50 for even a mediocre chain restaurant. At a nice restaurant? We're talking $100+ easy. That's a $15-20+ dollar tip per 4-top. A 4-person pizza order (4 individual-sized, 2 mediums, or 1-2 larges) would not likely top $25-30. So you're looking at $4-6. You'd have to make 4 4-person deliveries just to match that one table at a nice restaurant (or 2 tables at a mediocre restaurant). I've also waited tables - from recollection, I'd typically have at most 7 at a time, and an aggressive average turnover time for any one of them would be 90 minutes. So, a little over 4 an hour turning over, if things are really moving fast and you're spread pretty thin. I was never a driver, so I trust you know better, but how many orders on average would you deliver in an hour? I have to think it's well over 3-4 unless the delivery area's really spread out. And comparing the bill on a four top at a non-pizza restaurant (from which almost no one ever orders for delivery, anyway) to the bill on enough delivered pizza to feed four is unfair. The bill for four adults eating in at Pizza Hut would not quadruple the bill for four adults ordering Pizza Hut to a house.

I don't mean to sound like a cheapskate, or demean delivery guys. At the end of the day, for a $20 pizza delivery I'm still tipping 15% at $3, and I pseudoconsciously scale up a bit if I'm ordering in sushi or something and it approaches $50. But not to $10 on that $50. The restaurant has offered me the option of delivery, and has the opportunity (in the case of the sushi place it has almost certainly taken advantage of that opportunity) to charge me a flat fee or other gross-up for the convenience, which equates in labor to the act of the driver getting in their car and coming to my driveway. Beyond that, they drop the food off, get me the right bag, and hopefully take care not to spill by not driving like a maniac (which, I should note, is something tipped for without evidence of the service actually having been performed, until the food is opened after the driver's left and it's too late to hold them accountable - unlike a table server who massively messes up). I'll drop a couple bucks for that, mostly because it's the cultural norm and I can part with a couple dollars for a college kid or whomever. But that service is just not worth $10 on a $50 bill, above and beyond a charge already placed by the restaurant, sorry.

CDu

03-13-2013, 10:22 AM

But as you've explained upthread, I've already paid for that convenience. There's a delivery fee already on my bill, and I assume only a portion of it goes to the driver for gas and auto amortization. The rest is the restaurant's convenience charge to me for not having to leave my house. If they want to jack that up and see how customers balance that convenience of delivery against the relative hassle of pickup, they can do so. Many do, charging upwards of $5 or more above the menu total, and I'll still order to save 10 minutes and a car run. That this amount has been whittled down to nothing or close to it at a pizza place, by the market, is not really my concern. It's become a market expectation that, when it comes to pizza at least, the convenience is factored into the price through competition; there are enough places willing to not charge for the convenience that it's essentially become a freebie, and it's baked into the cost on the menu. No pun intended.

No, you haven't:
- delivery charge covers gas/amortization of vehicle (with some of that charge going to the restaurant and some going to the delivery guy)
- tip covers the convenience

The waiter doesn't get all of the money for the delivery charge, so you are indeed hosing the delivery guy by not giving him a better tip for the convenience. If you don't think it's fair that the restaurant is pocketing that extra portion of the delivery charge, then don't order delivery. But don't take it out on the delivery guy by shorting him on the tip.

I've also waited tables - from recollection, I'd typically have at most 7 at a time, and an aggressive average turnover time for any one of them would be 90 minutes. So, a little over 4 an hour turning over, if things are really moving fast and you're spread pretty thin. I was never a driver, so I trust you know better, but how many orders on average would you deliver in an hour? I have to think it's well over 3-4 unless the delivery area's really spread out. And comparing the bill on a four top at a non-pizza restaurant (from which almost no one ever orders for delivery, anyway) to the bill on enough delivered pizza to feed four is unfair. The bill for four adults eating in at Pizza Hut would not quadruple the bill for four adults ordering Pizza Hut to a house.

I'd say my average turnover as a waiter was well below 90 minutes for a table unless you're eating at a REALLY fancy restaurant (in which case the bill and tip are going to be MUCH higher). There are certainly tables that will linger for well over an 90 minutes, but I'd put the average at closer to 60-75 minutes. You'll have some 45 minute tables, and some over 90 minutes, the usual was less (at least for me it was). But I also rarely had more than 4-5 tables at a time, though. Any more, and the quality of service would go down. As a backwaiter, I'd have as many as 8-10 (backing up two waiters), but not as a waiter.

As a delivery guy, you can probably make one or two runs in an hour (it depends on the size of the delivery area). From there, it depends on and when from where the orders are placed. Pizza joints try to combine orders in similar locations so that the drivers don't drive around too much. But even then, it's rare that you get more than 2-3 orders on a run. So you are looking at maybe 4-5 (6 if you're lucky) deliveries in an hour.

Trust me: the pay was definitely better as a waiter.

And I'm not sure why it matters what type of restaurant we're talking about. People don't typically go to dine in at pizza restaurants. The vast majority of pizza business is on delivery/pickup (which is why many pizza joints only offer delivery/pickup). That's why I used a non-pizza restaurant as an example: if you're going to go out to eat, you're probably choosing a "real" restaurant and not a pizza joint. If you're wanting to go cheaper and less hassle, you order delivery.

I don't mean to sound like a cheapskate, or demean delivery guys. At the end of the day, for a $20 pizza delivery I'm still tipping 15% at $3, and I pseudoconsciously scale up a bit if I'm ordering in sushi or something and it approaches $50. But not to $10 on that $50. The restaurant has offered me the option of delivery, and has the opportunity (in the case of the sushi place it has almost certainly taken advantage of that opportunity) to charge me a flat fee or other gross-up for the convenience, which equates in labor to the act of the driver getting in their car and coming to my driveway. Beyond that, they drop the food off, get me the right bag, and hopefully take care not to spill by not driving like a maniac (which, I should note, is something tipped for without evidence of the service actually having been performed, until the food is opened after the driver's left and it's too late to hold them accountable - unlike a table server who massively messes up). I'll drop a couple bucks for that, mostly because it's the cultural norm and I can part with a couple dollars for a college kid or whomever. But that service is just not worth $10 on a $50 bill, above and beyond a charge already placed by the restaurant, sorry.

I'm totally okay with a 15% tip on delivery. The way you made it sound seemed like you were comfortable tipping substantially less, as though delivery guys don't deserve anything more than the delivery charge (of which they aren't getting all of it).

Mal

03-13-2013, 12:08 PM

No, you haven't:
- delivery charge covers gas/amortization of vehicle (with some of that charge going to the restaurant and some going to the delivery guy)
- tip covers the convenience

The waiter doesn't get all of the money for the delivery charge, so you are indeed hosing the delivery guy by not giving him a better tip for the convenience. If you don't think it's fair that the restaurant is pocketing that extra portion of the delivery charge, then don't order delivery. But don't take it out on the delivery guy by shorting him on the tip.

I think you're trying to have it both ways here. Tips are for service. What is the remainder of the delivery charge, the portion that doesn't go to the driver, supposed to be for, if not convenience? If a restaurant charges me a $5 delivery fee, gives two dollars to the driver and keeps three, that last three dollars is the additional profit to the restaurant for having provided me the convenience of their food at my house. Either way, I've paid $5 more than I would have picking it up myself, right off the bat. Convenience is a product, and as such should be reflected on a bill; carrying my food from car to door is a service, and should be covered by a gratuity. As I mentioned, if the restaurant wants to charge me more for that convenience, and most "nicer" restaurants do, they should go for it and see what customers are willing to absorb. While the driver is the physical manifestation of the convenience of delivered food, they're just an employee of the restaurant providing me that convenience, a product offered the public by their employer. They're not independent contractors whom I call and ask "Hey, will you go to X restaurant, pick up my dinner and bring it here?"

If convenience is supposed to be covered by a percentage tip, then I have to ask how convenience is scaled up by the amount of food ordered or its base underlying price. I don't think it is. There's a dollar value, not a percentage value, attached to my being able to eat a meal on my couch as opposed to in a restaurant. It's no more convenient to me if I order another thirty bucks worth of food, or from a more expensive menu, than it already is.

And I'm not sure why it matters what type of restaurant we're talking about. People don't typically go to dine in at pizza restaurants. The vast majority of pizza business is on delivery/pickup (which is why many pizza joints only offer delivery/pickup). That's why I used a non-pizza restaurant as an example: if you're going to go out to eat, you're probably choosing a "real" restaurant and not a pizza joint. If you're wanting to go cheaper and less hassle, you order delivery.

That's the point, though. You were comparing what a pizza delivery person made with a server at a traditional restaurant. We should be comparing the server at a pizza joint with a pizza delivery person, or the driver from a traditional restaurant with someone who waits tables at the same restaurant.

Take a hypothetical: James is a server at Pizzaria, and handles a party of 30 that orders 20 pizzas for $300. Assume that the group also orders $50 worth of sodas, for a total bill of $350. James will expect to get a tip of around $70, for having his attention given solely to this group for over an hour. Bob is a driver at Pizzaria, and gets a delivery order for 20 pizzas and $50 worth of breaksticks to one house. It takes Bob 5 minutes to pile this all in his car, 5 minutes to drive to the house, 10 minutes to deposit it all and 5 to return. 25 minutes total, he's interacted with one person at the door for about two minutes, and otherwise been in his car or shuffling back and forth with boxes. Does Bob deserve a $70 tip, too? I say emphatically "No." He doesn't deserve $55, either. He does deserve more than $3 or $4, as the effort is significantly greater than one trip to my door. But not 20-25 times greater.

I'm totally okay with a 15% tip on delivery. The way you made it sound seemed like you were comfortable tipping substantially less, as though delivery guys don't deserve anything more than the delivery charge (of which they aren't getting all of it). Let me rephrase: It happens to work out that on a less expensive delivery, the 3 or 4 bucks I drop as a tip will work out to 15% or so. But I'm not tipping based on a percentage of the bill - I do that for someone actually waiting on me. If it's a $60 bill, I am in fact comfortable tipping a delivery person substantially less than 15-20%. This is not because I believe the delivery person doesn't deserve anything more than whatever portion of the delivery charge they're being given by the restaurant. It's because I don't believe they deserve a particular percentage of the bill more than whatever portion of the delivery charge they're being given by the restaurant.

Perhaps I'm in a great minority and a cheapo here, I don't know. What do other folks (as if anyone else is still reading this!) do?

Thanks for the fun discussion, CDu.

CDu

03-13-2013, 03:02 PM

Let me rephrase: It happens to work out that on a less expensive delivery, the 3 or 4 bucks I drop as a tip will work out to 15% or so. But I'm not tipping based on a percentage of the bill - I do that for someone actually waiting on me. If it's a $60 bill, I am in fact comfortable tipping a delivery person substantially less than 15-20%. This is not because I believe the delivery person doesn't deserve anything more than whatever portion of the delivery charge they're being given by the restaurant. It's because I don't believe they deserve a particular percentage of the bill more than whatever portion of the delivery charge they're being given by the restaurant.

Perhaps I'm in a great minority and a cheapo here, I don't know. What do other folks (as if anyone else is still reading this!) do?

Thanks for the fun discussion, CDu.

But the bolded part makes little sense. If you feel that the delivery guy doesn't deserve a particular percentage of the bill, why do you not have a similar standard for a waiter?

I've waited at three restaurants, each varying in quality (i.e., different bill amounts). I did roughly the same amount of work per table at each restaurant (actually, I did a bit less work overall at the fancy restaurant where I had a back waiter, but did a bit more with wine service, but that's tangential to the point). My tips obviously varied by restaurant, as most people follow the percentage of bill rule. But I could serve an $8 plate in the exact same manner that I could serve a $40 plate. Obviously, my tip would be better on the $40 plate, but I'm not working notably harder for that tip (which would amount to anywhere from a $5-7 difference in tip for roughly the same service).

If you're willing to follow the percentage rules for waitstaff (even though the amount of work they do doesn't really vary proportionate to the bill), why are you not willing to extend the same courtesy to a delivery guy? That just doesn't really make any sense to me.

Mal

03-13-2013, 04:35 PM

But the bolded part makes little sense. If you feel that the delivery guy doesn't deserve a particular percentage of the bill, why do you not have a similar standard for a waiter?

I anticipated that response and didn't want to acknowledge it for you - kudos. :D I don't know. I guess the short answer to your question is I've accepted that that's not the paradigm for in-store wait service. I don't want to be Mr. Pink.

That said, I'd like to have a similar standard for waiters, frankly. I tend to even it out a bit myself; for instance, when I'm at a diner alone for breakfast and the bill's 10 bucks I'll happily tip $5 for the work done. That's a 50% tip, because I know that waiter's working just as hard as one at a place where if I were eating alone the bill would be $25 and I'd leave a standard 20%.

But, I also distinguish between the services provided by the waiter at my table and the services provided by the deliverer at my door, and feel there's enough of a difference in both nature and quantity that the same rules don't need to apply. There's an inherent contradiction in extending the percentage of the bill rule to one person and not another, yes, but there's also an irreconcilable issue with the idea of tipping delivery on the same percentage basis as waiting, then. Because they are fundamentally different actions. If we're going to give waiters 20% for what they do for us, and are expected to apply a percentage of bill rule to drivers, too, then drivers should expect 5-10%, meaning a buck or two on a $20 delivery.

I think the optimum situation might start with acknowledging that the result you saw at three different restaurants is itself unjust, because a percentage concept in tipping is inherently absurd. Perhaps there's more refined service expected at the nicer restaurant, but the amount of stress on the waiter and the level of skill required to tend to customers at varying price range restaurants does not scale up arithmetically with the bill. In a just world, you'd receive a much smaller percentage at the more expensive place (or a much larger one at the cheapest, or some combination). Why would we want that unjust result to filter down into the world of delivery, too?

We seem to manage just fine in tipping situations where there's no bill off which to base a percentage tip. Couple bucks per bag at curbside check-in; $2 to a parking valet; $3-5 to a bellhop. There's no reason other than tradition that we couldn't do something similar for waitstaff. The percentage itself has evolved over time, so I don't know why the basic paradigm couldn't, as well.

Channing

03-14-2013, 10:59 AM

I don't have much to add to the substantive discussion, except that on occasion I tipped the delivery driver up to 100% of the bill. Those occasions, though, were in the town where I attended law school. On occasion some friends and I found ourselves out in the downtown area and in no shape to drive home. We would walk to the local pizza place, order a pizza to go, and catch a ride home with the delivery guy. We always thought he earned his tip.

duke23

03-14-2013, 12:42 PM

Perhaps I'm in a great minority and a cheapo here, I don't know. What do other folks (as if anyone else is still reading this!) do?

Thanks for the fun discussion, CDu.

I'll chip in that I generally do what Mal does - $3 on a $20 order, and then increase by $1 for every additional $15-20 or so. These are just completely different services to me - if the delivery guy wants to set my table, refill my drink, wash my dishes... that would be a whole different story. I've always wondered what most people do, though.

Neither of you have actually said what you would have tipped for the $1453 delivery in question. I probably would have just tacked on $100, and had no idea if that was "correct" or not.

CDu

03-14-2013, 02:44 PM

I'll chip in that I generally do what Mal does - $3 on a $20 order, and then increase by $1 for every additional $15-20 or so. These are just completely different services to me - if the delivery guy wants to set my table, refill my drink, wash my dishes... that would be a whole different story. I've always wondered what most people do, though.

Neither of you have actually said what you would have tipped for the $1453 delivery in question. I probably would have just tacked on $100, and had no idea if that was "correct" or not.

It's just hard to know (I've never delivered a pizza order larger than ~$100). That size order must have been like 100 pizzas, right? Surely multiple delivery people were needed. Each of them would need to be tipped. And given how much

And what you and Mal do seems like it should be reasonable (assuming you did the same thing with waiters). It's just not the accepted etiquette in the US. Now, don't ask me why the US has gone to a percentage tipping system when order price varies MUCH more than effort of service. But that's just the way it is.

bjornolf

03-17-2013, 10:33 PM

It's just hard to know (I've never delivered a pizza order larger than ~$100). That size order must have been like 100 pizzas, right? Surely multiple delivery people were needed. Each of them would need to be tipped. And given how much

And what you and Mal do seems like it should be reasonable (assuming you did the same thing with waiters). It's just not the accepted etiquette in the US. Now, don't ask me why the US has gone to a percentage tipping system when order price varies MUCH more than effort of service. But that's just the way it is.

I think it was 85 pizzas which I commented seemed awfully expensive per pizza.

brumby041

03-21-2013, 11:08 AM

When I worked as a pizza delivery guy (best summer job ever, by the way), part of the delivery charge was to cover gas for the drivers. We got a nominal fee per-delivery from the restaurant (when I did it, it was like $0.75 per address). So the delivery charge was to cover that fee (not saying that all of the charge went to the drivers, but some definitely did). It was most certainly NOT intended to be the tip.

This is one area in which the delivery industry differs from regular restaurant dining. The "waiters" in the delivery industry must pay for gas and car maintenance. Most pizza restaurants are nice enough to acknowledge this, and factor it in to the workers' pay. They then pass the fee on to the consumer as a convenience fee (i.e., you save time and gas moneyy by not having to leave your house to get served). People should reasonably expect to pay for both the convenience AND the service.

One other difference that I haven't seen pointed out in the pizza delivery example is the difference in hourly wage. This could have changed in the intervening decades, but when I delivered pizza for Domino's in the late 80's (30 minutes or it's FREE!), this is how our pay worked:

Minimum wage - $4 something an hour, I think
Mileage - reset your trip meter at the beginning of your shift, read off the total at the end, multiply times rate, which I think was 20 cents a mile or so.
Additional mileage - if you agreed to put the Domino's sign on your car (with the suction cups and straps), you got a slightly higher mileage rate.
Tips

On average, I made about $10/hour, which seemed good for a college kid on summer break. However, that also had to cover gas and maintenance. (In fairness, I'm confident that the "mileage" pay covered my gas - it was a small Toyota with great gas mileage - I can't speak for my coworker with the big Buick...and gas didn't cost $4/gallon)

At any rate, I believe that waiters get a smaller hourly wage, and the expectation is that the tips will cover the rest of the waiters pay.

I actually had people demand every cent in change (not even a round-up to the next dollar) because they felt that the delivery cost was part of the cost of the pie. (There was no delivery charge.) And they would play games with the 30 minute guarantee - i.e. game the clock, don't answer the door right away, or be slow, or whatever - and then expect to not only get the pizza for free but not have to tip the driver either. (Who likely risked his life to get you your @#$@@in' pizza to you in 30 minutes or less you greedy #$#$%#%#!!!)

Anyway, my point is that since the delivery driver is getting a "real" wage, the % tipping system is not as applicable. I generally tip $3-5 flat for pizza delivery.

Brumby