J. Clarke wrote:

>>> Was it her fault? If it was, I'd pay 10%. If she couldn't avoid it due
>>> to under-staffing, I would pay the 15% and talk with the manager.
>>
>>
>>
>> Okay... so I pay 15% if the service is good, but if the service is bad I
>> only pay 10%.... but if the service is bad because they are understaffed
>> I pay her 15% anyway. I still end up paying 15% for rotten service. If
>> the reason for the bad service is that they are understaffed that means
>> that she is serving more people and, hopefully, getting tips from more
>> people. We were there for about 2 hours and if she got averaged 15% from
>> each couple that would make it about $150 for two hours work....$75 per
>> hour.
>
> Two views--one is that you reward the performance no matter the reasons,
> the other is that you tip the person for making a good effort even if
> circumstances beyond their control prevent it resulting in superior
> performance.

No one rewarded me when I was working. I got promotions, but no tips.
Tipping started as a form of remuneration for otherwise unpaid staff.
Some employers pay bonuses based on performance. When it comes to
rewarding servers for good service there is no set standard. Some people
do not tip at all, or very little.I generally tip 15% or better. Others
tip at least 20%. That means that a really good server could work his or
her butt off for a cheapskate and get little or no reward while another
one could slack off and screw things up completely and get rewarded with
a 20% tip.


> Personally I've never met a rich waiter.


Waiting tables, by definition, is menial labour. Why would you expect
them to get rich at it? It is basically marginal employment. Most of
them do not work full time at it. I know people who do quite well at waiting