Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.

Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?

I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
smaller tables with a big sign out front.

BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
.....NOW!

nb

notbob > wrote in
:

> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>


If there's a surcharge, then you shouldn't have to tip.

Bottom line, the USA should pay their workers the rate they are entitled
to, as the rest of the (civilised) world does.... instead of being the
cheap assholes they are and paying "minimum wage" where the worker has to
survive on tips to live.

If you pay your workers peanuts, you get monkeys doing the job.

--
Peter
Brisbane
Australia

Success isn't so difficult.
Just bite off more than you can chew,
then go do it.

On 2 Feb 2013 13:00:23 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
>Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
>not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>
>I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
>parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
>table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
>almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
>rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
>table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
>smaller tables with a big sign out front.
>
>BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
>up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
>Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
>....NOW!
>
>nb
>
>

Surcharge? No. Tip? Yes.

If the surcharge is going to the house, I'd walk out. If going to the
wait staff, I'd just pay it and not leave a tip since that is the tip.
While I'm of the nature that it should be my choice how much to tip,
there are valid reasons to charge for the larger parties. The reason
is, left to their own devices, they usually don't tip much at all. The
larger the group, the more meager the tip.

You can make arguments both ways, such as paying a good wage and
eliminating the tip. As long as you know up front, I don't have a
problem with the 18% add on. Every year at our Christmas party (about
40 people) they add the 18%. Unlike the cheapo pastor, the bill is
paid with additional tip added.

On 2 Feb 2013 13:00:23 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
>Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
>not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
....

I think not too. If any restaurant I ever went charged an automatic
"tip" then not only would that be ALL they got as a tip (I typically
tip very well too, more than 20%) it would also be ther last time I
ever patronized them!

John Kuthe...

On 2013-02-02, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> If the surcharge is going to the house, I'd walk out. If going to the
> wait staff, I'd just pay it and not leave a tip since that is the tip.

I don't care how the establishment justifies it or works it out. Not
my problem. It's merely an expense to me.

> While I'm of the nature that it should be my choice how much to tip,
> there are valid reasons to charge for the larger parties. The reason
> is, left to their own devices, they usually don't tip much at all. The
> larger the group, the more meager the tip.

That's a social/psychological issue and I tend to agree. I've seen
this social dynamic in action too many time. Makes ya' wanna knock
some of yer fellow diners upside the head. My solution, I don't dine
with those ppl.

This entire issue could easily be solved if the establishment DID put
the charge up front. Large block letters hanging over the door. YOU
WILL BE CHARGED....! But no, most establishments hide it, like a
dirty littel secret, then spring it at the last moment. 'Well, we
want your business, but we want you to pay extra if...' It's a cheat,
a con, and it's as slimey as the non-tippers in groups who hide behind
the anonymity of numbers.

I figure it this way. One or two ppl, ppl feel exposed, vulnerable,
'Everyone will know I'm a blackguard if I stiff the server', so they
pay a decent tip. But, get in a group, where there are many, and ppl
get all devious and tightfisted, 'No one will know it's me who is
scurvy dirtbag of the lowest order'. I've had fights with ppl like
this. In fact I had a boss who absolutely refused any kind of tip at
all. "NO! I don't tip". What an ass! We knew we'd hafta pony up to
cover his shortage. It got so I jes declined his invites.

Carry on.

nb

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> You can make arguments both ways, such as paying a good wage and
> eliminating the tip. As long as you know up front, I don't have a
> problem with the 18% add on. Every year at our Christmas party (about
> 40 people) they add the 18%. Unlike the cheapo pastor, the bill is
> paid with additional tip added.

I don't eat out often but when I do I always tip 25-30 percent. I know
that's high but I also realize that waitresses get paid very little and
count on tips. I appreciate their care (if it's good) so I don't mind
paying that.

If I wanted to save money, I'd cook at home for much cheaper, even without
the tip.

Gary

On Saturday, February 2, 2013 7:17:38 AM UTC-6, I'm back wrote:
>
>
> If you pay your workers peanuts, you get monkeys doing the job.
>
No. If you pay your workers peanuts, you get elephants. If you pay
your workers *bananas*, you get monkeys. Don't little Australian
children learn these things?

This incident happened, yeah, you guessed it, in St. Louis. It's about
2 blocks from where The Bonobos were headquartered. Speaking of elephants,
that pastor bears some resemblance.
http://www.heavy.com/regions/2013/02...-need-to-know/
>
> --
>
> Peter
>
--Bryan

On 02/02/2013 9:31 AM, Gary wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> You can make arguments both ways, such as paying a good wage and
>> eliminating the tip. As long as you know up front, I don't have a
>> problem with the 18% add on. Every year at our Christmas party (about
>> 40 people) they add the 18%. Unlike the cheapo pastor, the bill is
>> paid with additional tip added.
>
> I don't eat out often but when I do I always tip 25-30 percent. I know
> that's high but I also realize that waitresses get paid very little and
> count on tips. I appreciate their care (if it's good) so I don't mind
> paying that.

You're right. It is high.

>
> If I wanted to save money, I'd cook at home for much cheaper, even without
> the tip.
>
Sorry, but I don't buy into the argument that if you can afford to eat
out you can afford to pay a larger tip. I am not into playing Mr.
Bigshot and expecting wait staff to jump when I snap my fingers. They
aren't trained dogs. The taking of orders and delivery of food is part
of the service that you get when you eat in a restaurant. If I have to
pay extra to get a smile and the patronizing tip soliciting behaviour I
will take the food without the smile and save the money.

notbob wrote:
> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>
> I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
> parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
> table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
> almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
> rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
> table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
> smaller tables with a big sign out front.
>
> BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
> up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
> Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
> ....NOW!
>



If there's a surcharge (which ****es me off), I don't leave a tip. I
tend to order cheap, but I'm a big tipper, so the waitress gets less
this way.

They must have each ordered just a coffee or iced tea. And then
probably sat there taking up a big table for 90 minutes. If the place
was almost empty, that's OK. If it was busy, manager should've asked
them (after about 20 minutes) to order some food or leave.

Bob

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 08:48:56 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> On 2 Feb 2013 13:00:23 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
> >Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
> >
> >Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> >not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
> >
> >I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
> >parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
> >table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
> >almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
> >rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
> >table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
> >smaller tables with a big sign out front.
> >
> >BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
> >up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
> >Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
> >....NOW!
> >
At least you got that part right... and tell them to never come back
as a final fare-thee-well.
>
> Surcharge? No. Tip? Yes.
>
> If the surcharge is going to the house, I'd walk out. If going to the
> wait staff, I'd just pay it and not leave a tip since that is the tip.

Exactly. At least the places I've eaten at that have the policy have
the presence of mind to call it a "gratuity", not a surcharge. You're
free to tip more and we often do when we see the staff was paying
close attention to the table.

> While I'm of the nature that it should be my choice how much to tip,
> there are valid reasons to charge for the larger parties. The reason
> is, left to their own devices, they usually don't tip much at all. The
> larger the group, the more meager the tip.

As the money "taker", you're lucky to get what you need for the food
itself and often left holding the bag for tip. That's why just
splitting the bill evenly works better (no matter what the individuals
order). If alcohol is involved, the drinkers are responsible for
their own bar tabs and if anyone doesn't like that financial
arrangement, they are free to decline to join in.
>
> You can make arguments both ways, such as paying a good wage and
> eliminating the tip. As long as you know up front, I don't have a
> problem with the 18% add on. Every year at our Christmas party (about
> 40 people) they add the 18%. Unlike the cheapo pastor, the bill is
> paid with additional tip added.

Agreed on all points and 15-20% is what any normal person in their
right mind gives and more when the server is really paying attention
to you. Most servers do not have company benefits and live off their
tips. Cheap skates like NB and that pastor shouldn't be allowed to
eat out.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> On 02/02/2013 9:31 AM, Gary wrote:

> > I don't eat out often but when I do I always tip 25-30 percent. I know
> > that's high but I also realize that waitresses get paid very little and
> > count on tips. I appreciate their care (if it's good) so I don't mind
> > paying that.
>
> You're right. It is high.
>
> >
> > If I wanted to save money, I'd cook at home for much cheaper, even without
> > the tip.
> >
> Sorry, but I don't buy into the argument that if you can afford to eat
> out you can afford to pay a larger tip. I am not into playing Mr.
> Bigshot and expecting wait staff to jump when I snap my fingers. They
> aren't trained dogs. The taking of orders and delivery of food is part
> of the service that you get when you eat in a restaurant. If I have to
> pay extra to get a smile and the patronizing tip soliciting behaviour I
> will take the food without the smile and save the money.

That's not me, Dave. I don't play the bigshot,etc. The waitress has no idea
what her tip will be until I leave. I am very polite and non-demanding at a
restaurant but since I am being catered to, I have no problem leaving a
slightly larger tip.

For example... say for a party of 2-3 people and the bill comes to $100.
Rather than pay $118, I will pay $125-130. We are talking a small
difference of 7-12 dollars extra here for a tip to help out a good waitress
who probably makes about $3 per hour plus tips.

Your bill would be at least $118 (with an 18% tip). Will it kill you to add
a few more dollars and make someones day?

IMO, people that are tight with tipping should stay home and cook.

Gary

On 2 Feb 2013 14:20:47 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>
> This entire issue could easily be solved if the establishment DID put
> the charge up front. Large block letters hanging over the door. YOU
> WILL BE CHARGED....! But no, most establishments hide it, like a
> dirty littel secret, then spring it at the last moment. 'Well, we
> want your business, but we want you to pay extra if...' It's a cheat,
> a con, and it's as slimey as the non-tippers in groups who hide behind
> the anonymity of numbers.

Automatic gratuity for parties over x people is usually in plain
letters at the bottom of the menu. Most people haven't just fallen
off the haywagon; so if an automatic gratuity charge is something you
can't deal with - ask to see a menu before you put your butt in the
chair or call first and ASK the host/hostess about their large group
policy.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 2/2/2013 8:48 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 2 Feb 2013 13:00:23 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>>
>> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
>> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>>
>> I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
>> parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
>> table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
>> almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
>> rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
>> table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
>> smaller tables with a big sign out front.
>>
>> BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
>> up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
>> Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
>> ....NOW!
>>
>> nb
>>
>>
>
> Surcharge? No. Tip? Yes.
>
> If the surcharge is going to the house, I'd walk out. If going to the
> wait staff, I'd just pay it and not leave a tip since that is the tip.
> While I'm of the nature that it should be my choice how much to tip,
> there are valid reasons to charge for the larger parties. The reason
> is, left to their own devices, they usually don't tip much at all. The
> larger the group, the more meager the tip.
>
Absolutely. On the flip side of having been a server, I've been out
with large groups where they offered one check and added the gratuity.
Seems okay in theory. The problem with that was some people chowed down
on appetizers and ordered the most expensive items on the lunch menu.
This should be split (monetarily) equally among the guests? Nope.

Jill

On 2/2/2013 9:20 AM, notbob wrote:
> In fact I had a boss who absolutely refused any kind of tip at
> all. "NO! I don't tip". What an ass! We knew we'd hafta pony up to
> cover his shortage. It got so I jes declined his invites.

I used to go to lunch occasionally at one restaurant with a small group
(4 people) of co-workers. One woman *never* tipped. She ran the server
around like crazy and this wasn't even a large group. We usually had
separate checks. One of us us would create a ruse when we paid and were
leaving. We'd slip some money under this woman's plate for her share of
the tip. There's nothing worse than going out to eat with a cheapskate
who won't tip even for excellent service.

Jill

On 02/02/2013 10:47 AM, Gary wrote:

> For example... say for a party of 2-3 people and the bill comes to $100.
> Rather than pay $118, I will pay $125-130. We are talking a small
> difference of 7-12 dollars extra here for a tip to help out a good waitress
> who probably makes about $3 per hour plus tips.
>
> Your bill would be at least $118 (with an 18% tip). Will it kill you to add
> a few more dollars and make someones day?

Okay... turn it around..... if it is a small difference it shouldn't
affect the server if you don't leave it.


> IMO, people that are tight with tipping should stay home and cook.


I don't have a problem with the amount so much as I do with the
institution of tipping, the idea that some people should be so poorly
paid that they have to depend on the generosity of their customers to
make a decent living. I am all in favour of a system like they have in
places like the Netherlands, Germany and (most of) France where tax and
service are included in the menu price, so what you see is what you pay.
If you order 6 items ate 5 Euros, your bill is 30 Euros.... no extras
for tax, no calculating what is appropriate for a tip.


Bear mind that a tip, or gratuity, by definition, is voluntary. Some
people in the business have come to expect it, a sort of entitlement.
Not only that, the expect to be tipped a percentage on the entire bill,
including the tax. Worse yet, they argue that because of inflation the
percentage should be higher, suggesting a minimum of 20%.

Then we hear the argument that if you can afford to go out for dinner
you can afford to leave a big tip. Screw that. If they want to jack up
their prices with outrageous markups I am already paying a lot for the
luxury of going out to eat. For instance, we went to a place last
summer where they charge $14 for glass of wine, about the same price as
a whole bottle of that particular wine. That means a 500-600% markup on
the wine.


I am supposed to pay 15% on top of that for a service...... $12 to pour
the wine into a glass and walk 20 feet to the table?? Hold it.... no,
that is not enough..... it is an expensive restaurant, and if I can
afford to pay their high prices I should be able to afford 20%.. Not
when I am already being gouged. Sorry, but that is a racket.

On 02/02/2013 10:54 AM, jmcquown wrote:

> Absolutely. On the flip side of having been a server, I've been out
> with large groups where they offered one check and added the gratuity.
> Seems okay in theory. The problem with that was some people chowed down
> on appetizers and ordered the most expensive items on the lunch menu.
> This should be split (monetarily) equally among the guests? Nope.

My brother insists on separate bills. He thinks that everyone should be
responsible for their own food and drinks. To be fair, his wife will
have the more expensive meals and appetizers and dessert, and his bar
bill will be the highest.


I remember once going out for dinner at an expensive restaurant with our
neighbours. She tried Gran Marnier for the first time, and ordered
another, and another.... 5 of them. And that stuff is expensive. I
would be lying if I were to say that I did not resent splitting a bill
with someone who had really gone overboard on really expensive liquor.


Then there is a couple I know who went on a Caribbean vacation with some
friends of theirs. My friends don't drink. The other couple are both
lawyers who consider themselves to be wine connoisseurs and would order
at least two bottles of expensive wines. I guess they weren't close
enough friends to feel comfortable enough to tell the winos that they
weren't chipping in for the wine.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:56:13 -0400, wrote:

> I'm with you, except, if I receive poor service I might even not leave
> a tip. It's my way of saying that if they want to be rude, offhand
> etc. don't try it with me.

That's a poor excuse to be cheap. Servers always get a tip, how large
"depends". Inattentive (frankly, I've never experienced rude) service
gets the low end, IF it's the server's attitude that's at fault. If
the server is doing the best they can with inadequate staffing, we
give them a break. Poor attitude and poor staffing issues always
merits a stern talk with the manager on duty because neither situation
is tolerable to the paying customer.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:10:42 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 02/02/2013 10:47 AM, Gary wrote:
>
>> For example... say for a party of 2-3 people and the bill comes to $100.
>> Rather than pay $118, I will pay $125-130. We are talking a small
>> difference of 7-12 dollars extra here for a tip to help out a good waitress
>> who probably makes about $3 per hour plus tips.
>>
>> Your bill would be at least $118 (with an 18% tip). Will it kill you to add
>> a few more dollars and make someones day?
>
>Okay... turn it around..... if it is a small difference it shouldn't
>affect the server if you don't leave it.
>
>
>> IMO, people that are tight with tipping should stay home and cook.
>
>
>I don't have a problem with the amount so much as I do with the
>institution of tipping, the idea that some people should be so poorly
>paid that they have to depend on the generosity of their customers to
>make a decent living. I am all in favour of a system like they have in
>places like the Netherlands, Germany and (most of) France where tax and
>service are included in the menu price, so what you see is what you pay.
>If you order 6 items ate 5 Euros, your bill is 30 Euros.... no extras
>for tax, no calculating what is appropriate for a tip.
>
>
>Bear mind that a tip, or gratuity, by definition, is voluntary. Some
>people in the business have come to expect it, a sort of entitlement.
>Not only that, the expect to be tipped a percentage on the entire bill,
>including the tax. Worse yet, they argue that because of inflation the
>percentage should be higher, suggesting a minimum of 20%.
>
>Then we hear the argument that if you can afford to go out for dinner
>you can afford to leave a big tip. Screw that. If they want to jack up
>their prices with outrageous markups I am already paying a lot for the
>luxury of going out to eat. For instance, we went to a place last
>summer where they charge $14 for glass of wine, about the same price as
>a whole bottle of that particular wine. That means a 500-600% markup on
>the wine.
>
>
>I am supposed to pay 15% on top of that for a service...... $12 to pour
>the wine into a glass and walk 20 feet to the table?? Hold it.... no,
>that is not enough..... it is an expensive restaurant, and if I can
>afford to pay their high prices I should be able to afford 20%.. Not
>when I am already being gouged. Sorry, but that is a racket.
>
>
>
So you're going to retaliate against the lowest, most helpless figure
on the totem pole? You can argue your indignation against a system
you don't like but you don't affect the restaurant owner one iota
unless you stay home and don't eat out. When you eat out and pay your
bill, the restaurant still gets all their profit, doesn't make any
difference to their bottom line whether you tip or not.
Janet US

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 07:54:18 -0600, John Kuthe >
wrote:

>On 2 Feb 2013 13:00:23 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>>Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>>
>>Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
>>not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>...
>
>I think not too. If any restaurant I ever went charged an automatic
>"tip" then not only would that be ALL they got as a tip (I typically
>tip very well too, more than 20%) it would also be ther last time I
>ever patronized them!
>
>John Kuthe...

If the waitress waited on 10 tables of 2 people in the same amount of
time, she would realize a nice amount of tip. Because she is tied up
with 20 people at one table (takes a lot more time than one table) she
is vulnerable to getting stiffed for her work.
Janet US

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:54:25 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:

> On the flip side of having been a server, I've been out
> with large groups where they offered one check and added the gratuity.
> Seems okay in theory. The problem with that was some people chowed down
> on appetizers and ordered the most expensive items on the lunch menu.
> This should be split (monetarily) equally among the guests? Nope.


Sitting there calculating down to the penny how much individuals owe
is a female thing. It's not up to the server to decide how the party
collects the money - be glad you got a tip and weren't stiffed, then
fired - like what happened to that poor waitress at Applebee's
recently.
http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?p...d-de46c25b0e84

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 09:42:34 -0600, zxcvbob >
wrote:

>notbob wrote:
>> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>>
>> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
>> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>>
>> I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
>> parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
>> table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
>> almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
>> rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
>> table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
>> smaller tables with a big sign out front.
>>
>> BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
>> up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
>> Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
>> ....NOW!
>>
>
>If there's a surcharge (which ****es me off), I don't leave a tip. I
>tend to order cheap, but I'm a big tipper, so the waitress gets less
>this way.
>
>They must have each ordered just a coffee or iced tea. And then
>probably sat there taking up a big table for 90 minutes. If the place
>was almost empty, that's OK. If it was busy, manager should've asked
>them (after about 20 minutes) to order some food or leave.
>
>Bob

When I read the article, I'm sure it said that the total bill was over
$200.
Janet US

On 2/2/2013 11:10 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 02/02/2013 10:47 AM, Gary wrote:
>
>> For example... say for a party of 2-3 people and the bill comes to $100.
>> Rather than pay $118, I will pay $125-130. We are talking a small
>> difference of 7-12 dollars extra here for a tip to help out a good
>> waitress
>> who probably makes about $3 per hour plus tips.
>>
>> Your bill would be at least $118 (with an 18% tip). Will it kill you
>> to add
>> a few more dollars and make someones day?
>
> Okay... turn it around..... if it is a small difference it shouldn't
> affect the server if you don't leave it.
>
>
>> IMO, people that are tight with tipping should stay home and cook.
>
>
> I don't have a problem with the amount so much as I do with the
> institution of tipping, the idea that some people should be so poorly
> paid that they have to depend on the generosity of their customers to
> make a decent living. I am all in favour of a system like they have in
> places like the Netherlands, Germany and (most of) France where tax
> and service are included in the menu price, so what you see is what
> you pay. If you order 6 items ate 5 Euros, your bill is 30 Euros....
> no extras for tax, no calculating what is appropriate for a tip.
>
>
> Bear mind that a tip, or gratuity, by definition, is voluntary. Some
> people in the business have come to expect it, a sort of entitlement.
> Not only that, the expect to be tipped a percentage on the entire
> bill, including the tax. Worse yet, they argue that because of
> inflation the percentage should be higher, suggesting a minimum of 20%.
>
> Then we hear the argument that if you can afford to go out for dinner
> you can afford to leave a big tip. Screw that. If they want to jack up
> their prices with outrageous markups I am already paying a lot for the
> luxury of going out to eat. For instance, we went to a place last
> summer where they charge $14 for glass of wine, about the same price
> as a whole bottle of that particular wine. That means a 500-600%
> markup on the wine.
>
>
> I am supposed to pay 15% on top of that for a service...... $12 to
> pour the wine into a glass and walk 20 feet to the table?? Hold
> it.... no, that is not enough..... it is an expensive restaurant, and
> if I can afford to pay their high prices I should be able to afford
> 20%.. Not when I am already being gouged. Sorry, but that is a racket.
>
>
>
>
Yes, my income does not seem to keeping up with inflation, at least from
my recent grocery and gasoline bills. It is convenient to say that the
percentage tip should be raised for inflation but that innumeracy is
most often advanced by restaurant critics who don't even pay their own
bills.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.

> wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 08:39:15 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:56:13 -0400, wrote:
>>
>>> I'm with you, except, if I receive poor service I might even not leave
>>> a tip. It's my way of saying that if they want to be rude, offhand
>>> etc. don't try it with me.
>>
>>That's a poor excuse to be cheap. Servers always get a tip, how large
>>"depends". Inattentive (frankly, I've never experienced rude) service
>>gets the low end, IF it's the server's attitude that's at fault. If
>>the server is doing the best they can with inadequate staffing, we
>>give them a break. Poor attitude and poor staffing issues always
>>merits a stern talk with the manager on duty because neither situation
>>is tolerable to the paying customer.
>
> It has zilch to do with being cheap and more to do with not liking my
> plate slammed down in front of me, or a "Whadda ya want?" attitude.
> Why on earth reward bad service, that would seen highly unfair to the
> mostly likeable servers.

Good grief!!! If a someone did that to me I would walk out!!

--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Feb 2, 5:17*am, "I'm back" > wrote:
> notbob > wrote :
>
> > Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
> > Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> > not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>
> If there's a surcharge, then you shouldn't have to tip.
>
> Bottom line, the USA should pay their workers the rate they are entitled
> to, as the rest of the (civilised) world does.... instead of being the
> cheap assholes they are and paying "minimum wage" where the worker has to
> survive on tips to live.
>
> If you pay your workers peanuts, you get monkeys doing the job.
>


Truer word were never spoken. Unfortunately it's been going on a
long time and it is ingrained in the society.

Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 09:42:34 -0600, zxcvbob >
> wrote:
>
>> notbob wrote:
>>> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>>>
>>> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
>>> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>>>
>>> I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
>>> parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
>>> table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
>>> almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
>>> rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
>>> table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
>>> smaller tables with a big sign out front.
>>>
>>> BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
>>> up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
>>> Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
>>> ....NOW!
>>>
>> If there's a surcharge (which ****es me off), I don't leave a tip. I
>> tend to order cheap, but I'm a big tipper, so the waitress gets less
>> this way.
>>
>> They must have each ordered just a coffee or iced tea. And then
>> probably sat there taking up a big table for 90 minutes. If the place
>> was almost empty, that's OK. If it was busy, manager should've asked
>> them (after about 20 minutes) to order some food or leave.
>>
>> Bob
>
> When I read the article, I'm sure it said that the total bill was over
> $200.
> Janet US


I never saw an article, "notbob" said the bill was $34 and that's what I
conjectured with. (maybe $34 was the forced gratuity; that would be
about right if the bill was just under $200 before tax.)

Bob

On Feb 2, 9:20*am, ImStillMags > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 5:17*am, "I'm back" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > notbob > wrote :
>
> > > Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
> > > Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> > > not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>
> > If there's a surcharge, then you shouldn't have to tip.
>
> > Bottom line, the USA should pay their workers the rate they are entitled
> > to, as the rest of the (civilised) world does.... instead of being the
> > cheap assholes they are and paying "minimum wage" where the worker has to
> > survive on tips to live.
>
> > If you pay your workers peanuts, you get monkeys doing the job.
>
> Truer word were never spoken. * *Unfortunately it's been going on a
> long time and it is ingrained in the society.

Here in WA State, minimum wage is now over $9. Servers get paid
minimum wage, not like in some states that have a wage scale where
people who get tips get $3 a hour or so. Having a small independent
restaurant you learn to work with the big cost of doing business that
is salary costs. It's a big juggle for a lot of independents to make
it. What it does is that it weeds out the bad and sloppy and poorly
run restaurants.

People here know the servers make minimum wage and they still tip very
well, mainly because they get good food and good service and a
pleasant experience.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:10:42 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 02/02/2013 10:47 AM, Gary wrote:
>
> > For example... say for a party of 2-3 people and the bill comes to $100.
> > Rather than pay $118, I will pay $125-130. We are talking a small
> > difference of 7-12 dollars extra here for a tip to help out a good waitress
> > who probably makes about $3 per hour plus tips.
> >
> > Your bill would be at least $118 (with an 18% tip). Will it kill you to add
> > a few more dollars and make someones day?
>
> Okay... turn it around..... if it is a small difference it shouldn't
> affect the server if you don't leave it.

It does when the server is paid only $3 an hour compared to your $30+
per hour.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

jmcquown wrote:
>
> On 2/2/2013 9:20 AM, notbob wrote:
> > In fact I had a boss who absolutely refused any kind of tip at
> > all. "NO! I don't tip". What an ass! We knew we'd hafta pony up to
> > cover his shortage. It got so I jes declined his invites.
>
> I used to go to lunch occasionally at one restaurant with a small group
> (4 people) of co-workers. One woman *never* tipped. She ran the server
> around like crazy and this wasn't even a large group. We usually had
> separate checks. One of us us would create a ruse when we paid and were
> leaving. We'd slip some money under this woman's plate for her share of
> the tip. There's nothing worse than going out to eat with a cheapskate
> who won't tip even for excellent service.
>
> Jill

An auto tip is a bad idea generally. When they do it's usually 15-18%
and I normally do 20% so they loose there. It's a rare 1 in 10,000 type
thing, but on a few occasions I've had to leave a punitive 1% tip for
crap service.

On Sat, 2 Feb 2013 17:08:58 -0000, "Ophelia"
> wrote:

>
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 08:39:15 -0800, sf > wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:56:13 -0400, wrote:
> >>
> >>Poor attitude and poor staffing issues always
> >>merits a stern talk with the manager on duty because neither situation
> >>is tolerable to the paying customer.
> >
> > It has zilch to do with being cheap and more to do with not liking my
> > plate slammed down in front of me, or a "Whadda ya want?" attitude.
> > Why on earth reward bad service, that would seen highly unfair to the
> > mostly likeable servers.
>
> Good grief!!! If a someone did that to me I would walk out!!
>
Honestly, when does that ever happen? If it did, wouldn't you have a
"word" with the manager before you left?


--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

Gary wrote:
>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> You can make arguments both ways, such as paying a good wage and
>> eliminating the tip.

But that in no way ensures good service, in fact that's very likely to
promote poor to no service... and the food will cost a lot more no
matter the level of service. Tipping is a contract between patron and
server, has nothing to do with management, and as it should be.

>> As long as you know up front, I don't have a
>> problem with the 18% add on. Every year at our Christmas party (about
>> 40 people) they add the 18%. Unlike the cheapo pastor, the bill is
>> paid with additional tip added.
>
>I don't eat out often but when I do I always tip 25-30 percent. I know
>that's high but I also realize that waitresses get paid very little and
>count on tips. I appreciate their care (if it's good) so I don't mind
>paying that.

I also tip 20-25% and more... if not worth that tip I would never
return, if well tended to then it is worth that tip. I tend to eat at
my favorite haunts, they become my favorites because they are worth
the tip and that's why I return.

>If I wanted to save money, I'd cook at home for much cheaper, even without
>the tip.

Me too... there is very little I can't prepare better and cheaper at
home... especially the bar tab.

As to a surcharge for a large party, why not, try the prices at a
caterer. It definitely costs more and entails more time and effort
tending to a large party... also entails more wasted space, hardly
anyone wants to be seated next to a table serving a dozen people,
that's why restos have party rooms and insist reservations are made
well in advance. Also more than one server tends to a larger party
and so they split the tip, and as a rule larger parties leave small
tips, some folks leave nothing, a few folks will palm tips left by
others. A surcharge insures that the servers are tipped.

I've been to restos in countries where tipping is not expected,
neither is decent service expected because service in those countries
is surly, especially lousy service for tourists because the servers
know that they will never meet again.

I tip well at restos that I return to often, I return often because
the service is superb and is always superb because they know I tip
well... a win-win situation. The clowns who don't believe in tipping
can always dine at a fast food joint, the Clown doesn't expect tips.

On 2/2/2013 3:00 AM, notbob wrote:
> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>
> I think not. I once ran across this at a Chevy's. Surcharge for
> parties over six ppl. For what? Why? How is serving 6 ppl at one
> table more work than serving 3 ppl at two tables? And 18%! That's
> almost one fifth of the total added on. It's not only unfair, it's a
> rip-off, pure and simple. If it's such a chore to serve 6 ppl at one
> table, perhaps the proprietor should find another line of work or have
> smaller tables with a big sign out front.
>
> BTW, how in God's name (it was church folk) did 20 ppl manage to run
> up a bill of only $34 at an Applebees? Did they all order jes one
> Coke? If I'd been the mgr, Ida told the entire lot to "fly away"
> ....NOW!
>
> nb

Sounds like a good deal to me because it's gonna be less than I usually
tip. If you tip less than 18% it's not going to be a good deal.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:01:10 -0400, wrote:

> On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:51:11 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 2 Feb 2013 17:08:58 -0000, "Ophelia"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Good grief!!! If a someone did that to me I would walk out!!
> >>
> >Honestly, when does that ever happen? If it did, wouldn't you have a
> >"word" with the manager before you left?
>
>
> Not necessarily. The job is not well paid, the person has maybe taken
> flack that day, all sorts of possible reasons. I am not going to have
> a word with the manager, how spiteful is that when I do not know all
> the facts ?

So, you'd just walk out without paying? That's so grown up.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:01:10 -0400, wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:51:11 -0800, sf > wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, 2 Feb 2013 17:08:58 -0000, "Ophelia"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Good grief!!! If a someone did that to me I would walk out!!
>> >>
>> >Honestly, when does that ever happen? If it did, wouldn't you have a
>> >"word" with the manager before you left?
>>
>>
>> Not necessarily. The job is not well paid, the person has maybe taken
>> flack that day, all sorts of possible reasons. I am not going to have
>> a word with the manager, how spiteful is that when I do not know all
>> the facts ?
>
> So, you'd just walk out without paying? That's so grown up.

Oh, I would pay, but I might not ever return.
--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On 02/02/2013 11:43 AM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
>> I am supposed to pay 15% on top of that for a service...... $12 to pour
>> the wine into a glass and walk 20 feet to the table?? Hold it.... no,
>> that is not enough..... it is an expensive restaurant, and if I can
>> afford to pay their high prices I should be able to afford 20%.. Not
>> when I am already being gouged. Sorry, but that is a racket.
>>
>>
>>
> So you're going to retaliate against the lowest, most helpless figure
> on the totem pole? You can argue your indignation against a system
> you don't like but you don't affect the restaurant owner one iota
> unless you stay home and don't eat out. When you eat out and pay your
> bill, the restaurant still gets all their profit, doesn't make any
> difference to their bottom line whether you tip or not.
> Janet US

That's the problem there. I don't generally go to places like that. That
$14 glass of wine was way overpriced. It was a mediocre wine. Their
entire limited wine list was mediocre wines, wines that sell for $12-15
per bottle and that is what they were charging for each glass.
The food was also overpriced. It was tasty enough but very small
portions. My sea bass was eaten in four bites. We had their three
course menu and I could have eaten a second complete meal.

My son had made the reservations thinking that it sounded like an
interesting place and that my wife would like to go there for her
birthday. I won't be back. I know lots of places where I can get good
just as good or better and for a lot less money.

There is a local winery restaurant on my list of not to go to places.
Their wine selection is all their own products, and only the more
expensive wines they make. They are all marked way up. It's not like
they have a 5 star type wine cellar with thousands of bottles of vintage
wines that have been aging in their climate controlled cellar. The last
time were there was close to 10 years ago and the soup was $14.95 for
vegetable soup. What the hell can you put in vegetable soup that makes
it worth $14.95? It is not located in high rent downtown commercial
property. It is on their vineyard in the country.



But..... this tipping thing..... I am expected to pay a percentage of
everything, even when they have already jacked the prices way up??? That
doesn't work for me. I don't figure that I have paid for a big
expensive meal so the waiter has to be overcompensated. I do not pay tip
on the sales taxes that have been tacked on.

I can't afford to pay top rate tips on top of an over priced meal so I
shouldn't go out for dinner???? Screw that. If they can't make a living
on their menial labour position maybe they need to look for a better
job. FWIW... I have a nephew with a degree in hotel management who
opted to return to waiting tables because he makes more money at it than
he did in management.

On 02/02/2013 11:48 AM, Janet Bostwick wrote:

>
> If the waitress waited on 10 tables of 2 people in the same amount of
> time, she would realize a nice amount of tip. Because she is tied up
> with 20 people at one table (takes a lot more time than one table) she
> is vulnerable to getting stiffed for her work.
> Janet US
>


BUT.... if service was included in the price on the menu the servers
would not have to rely on the generosity of the customers.

On 2013-02-02 13:00:23 +0000, notbob said:

> Boy, this outta be good for a battle royal.
>
> Should restaurant patrons be subject to an automatic surcharge (it's
> not a tip!) for groups over a certain number?
>
> I think not.

I think they should--OR--employee's should be paid a decent wage by
their employees. That's really the either/or here.

On 2/2/2013 5:49 AM, sf wrote:
>
> Automatic gratuity for parties over x people is usually in plain
> letters at the bottom of the menu. Most people haven't just fallen
> off the haywagon; so if an automatic gratuity charge is something you
> can't deal with - ask to see a menu before you put your butt in the
> chair or call first and ASK the host/hostess about their large group
> policy.
>

You're right that I haven't fallen off a haywagon but that's because I
always use the seatbelts. There's a cost of doing business and also a
cost of using a service - not much point in bitching about it. I expect
a surcharge added for big groups, the reason for this should be pretty
obvious.

I love surcharges on big groups because I can save big money if I'm
footing the bill.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:27:59 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 02/02/2013 9:31 AM, Gary wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>>> You can make arguments both ways, such as paying a good wage and
>>> eliminating the tip. As long as you know up front, I don't have a
>>> problem with the 18% add on. Every year at our Christmas party (about
>>> 40 people) they add the 18%. Unlike the cheapo pastor, the bill is
>>> paid with additional tip added.
>>
>> I don't eat out often but when I do I always tip 25-30 percent. I know
>> that's high but I also realize that waitresses get paid very little and
>> count on tips. I appreciate their care (if it's good) so I don't mind
>> paying that.
>
>You're right. It is high.
>
>>
>> If I wanted to save money, I'd cook at home for much cheaper, even without
>> the tip.
>>
>Sorry, but I don't buy into the argument that if you can afford to eat
>out you can afford to pay a larger tip. I am not into playing Mr.
>Bigshot and expecting wait staff to jump when I snap my fingers. They
>aren't trained dogs. The taking of orders and delivery of food is part
>of the service that you get when you eat in a restaurant. If I have to
>pay extra to get a smile and the patronizing tip soliciting behaviour I
>will take the food without the smile and save the money.

You obviously don't eat out often or if you do you think national
chain restos is fine dining. Tipping has nothing to do with servers
hopping about like trained seals... it's what the servers do behind
the scenes that can't be seen is why I tip well, they make sure to
tell the kitchen that I'm a regular, makes all the difference in the
world to the quality of my meal. If you tip minimally (15% is
minimally) there is no way you can convince me that you get a quality
meal on your return visit, no way whatsoever... you'd be very lucky to
receive a meal that passes the minimal health code standard. And
experienced servers can tell quickly who tips well and who are the
cheapskates... the cheapos always give themselves away by ordering
from the menu by price, and from how they stiff the barmaid during the
meal... I tip for each drink, early on during the meal I get up and
tip the bartender too, I receive real 2nis and more than my tip in
comped drinks. I never put tips on plastic, all my tips are in green
money directly into the hand of my the server, I never leave a tip on
the table. Those who don't carry cash are the worst of the
cheapskates.

Read the article again. They insisted on separate checks, so the 34 bucks was prob. for 2-3 people.

I understand mandatory gratuity - it's to counteract the big cheapskate groups which are wont to haunt restos. I've been in those groups- some straggle in latee so they miss the appetizer part, some toss a 20 on the table and duck out early, The last guys left are the ones who get stuck making up the difference. Some shitheads don't even cover their FOOD, let alone throw in something toward a tip.

This is why, if I go out with a group, I go armed with plenty of fives and ones so I can cover my portion and not get stuck, even if it means a special trip to the bank to get those small bills. Beats getting stuck and stewin about it for years, and having to smile and act like nothing happened, next time you bump into these tightwads. It's usually a couple who you thought were in the bucks - ha. Burns my rear.

On Sat, 2 Feb 2013 19:11:28 -0000, "Ophelia"
> wrote:

>
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:01:10 -0400, wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:51:11 -0800, sf > wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Sat, 2 Feb 2013 17:08:58 -0000, "Ophelia"
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Good grief!!! If a someone did that to me I would walk out!!
> >> >>
> >> >Honestly, when does that ever happen? If it did, wouldn't you have a
> >> >"word" with the manager before you left?
> >>
> >>
> >> Not necessarily. The job is not well paid, the person has maybe taken
> >> flack that day, all sorts of possible reasons. I am not going to have
> >> a word with the manager, how spiteful is that when I do not know all
> >> the facts ?
> >
> > So, you'd just walk out without paying? That's so grown up.
>
> Oh, I would pay, but I might not ever return.
> --

Nobody says you should.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.