For the fourteen bucks, we stamp your hand so you can get in again if you go out for a smoke or something.
Why should i pay $14 to enter the US?
- Thread starter nacelle
- Start date
If you are trying to tell me that a $30 tab, where the customer pays $33 total ($3 tip) and the restaurant and server are losing money on that deal...
then you are a liar.
If you told me that you know what Free Riderism is, then you are a liar.
The server may indeed be losing money if they gave you more than $3 worth of service.
Based on the link provided above...
"In economics, "free riders" are those who consume a resource without paying for it, or pay less than the full cost of its production"
Paying $33 on a $30 tab is neither "consuming a resource without paying for it" nor "pay less than full cost of its production"
You are taking advantage of the fact that people tip more so that you can tip less. If only one free rider does it, then it will not significantly impact a waiter's pay. However if a lot of people start doing it, it will severely impact the waiter's ability to pay bills, rent etc.
The cost of production does include the sever's time and effort which is paid for 90% from tips. So therefore you paid less that it's full cost.
The cost of production does include the sever's time and effort which is paid for 90% from tips. So therefore you paid less that it's full cost.
Brew and Robert Maxwell explained basically what I meant. In addition, there's the idea that, if everyone did it, the cost of wages would have to rise to compensate so the entire cost of the meal would increase. By not paying tips, you take advantage of the system as it currently exists without fulling paying the amount needed to support the system. We can debate what the exact amount is, but 10% certainly isn't it.
Then again, on the other side of that equation, if I pay $10 for a $2 or 3 hamburger, and then $2.50 for a soda that costs maybe 25 cents, the bill's about $13.50 after taxes. $15 total is hardly stealing from anyone. ($16.20 is 20% in that math). If there's a disconnect in there, it's between the restuarant and the servers. Putting that burden onto the customer is kinda screwy, but how things work, I guess.
Telling the customer they're STEALING, or not paying for what they received, is just screwed up.
Telling the customer they're STEALING, or not paying for what they received, is just screwed up.
Doesn't this argument assume that there still wouldn't be a plentiful supply of people wanting to be waiters even with lower levels of remuneration?
I would suggest that the large pool of available people willing to do the job even with a 10% tip level, there isn't any pressure on wages, and no need to raise food prices.
It just means waiters would receive lower total remuneration, not that the business model would have to change. So I don't think he is free-riding, technically.
Amen. I think our company stopped because they were paying managers to figure this crap out and paying out more than they would if they just paid straight minimum to the servers.
Margins are low in that business. IIRC our break even was somewhere around $120,000 a month and sales somewhere between $135 and $145,000 average. Our company made more money on day trading using the cash generated by sales than it did on selling food.
This is exactly correct and just a more detailed way of explaining something I shouldn't have to explain in the first place.
I guess we can just add "free-rider" to "ignorant" and "i'll contaminate your food" as comments from waiters to customers that pay less than 20% tips in this thread.
Free-rider? I'm content with "cheap."
And, fwiw, few waiters actually contaminate food. There is absolutely no percentage in committing a criminal act of revenge that will go completely unnoticed by the target of that revenge.
And, fwiw, few waiters actually contaminate food. There is absolutely no percentage in committing a criminal act of revenge that will go completely unnoticed by the target of that revenge.
I consider that appropriate depending on context. Maybe even in most circumstances, certainly not all.
Well, if pay would drop, I do think the number of willing people would drop. Turnover is already very high. Certainly, the number of willing, motivated, and experienced servers would drop. Even if costs don't increase, quality of service would decrease. The stereotype of the disgruntled McDonald's worker would be the same for restaurants. The only difference is McDonald's workers are generally paid in the 9-10 dollars range.
Also, if servers received consistently 10% tips, I think there would be much greater pressure to enforce the minimum wage requirement (boost wages up to the wage of everyone else). My guess is that would be accomplished by cutting hours and trying to schedule servers only during peak hours, so as to ensure they wouldn't have to be paid during off hours. That means if you tried to get food during anything besides the peak, you run the risk of not getting service because there aren't enough people working.
I think you highly overestimate the job of a server. There is high turnover because for most people it's a job and not a career.
And really if it is a career there's not anything wrong with that, if you enjoy doing it and make good money, do what you do! (after stating that I should probably set my "college job" comment straight that I made earlier in the thread. There are a lot of younger and college age servers out there, so it makes sense the turnover would be high in restaurants in at least a small part due to this. Also I was more being a smartass along the lines of if you get stiffed 5% it's not the end of the world, where as other jobs have more serious consequences)
If theoretically tips dropped to 10% you probably would see a decline in service, but there are enough people to fill server jobs.
And really if it is a career there's not anything wrong with that, if you enjoy doing it and make good money, do what you do! (after stating that I should probably set my "college job" comment straight that I made earlier in the thread. There are a lot of younger and college age servers out there, so it makes sense the turnover would be high in restaurants in at least a small part due to this. Also I was more being a smartass along the lines of if you get stiffed 5% it's not the end of the world, where as other jobs have more serious consequences)
If theoretically tips dropped to 10% you probably would see a decline in service, but there are enough people to fill server jobs.
It is a job, not a career, I agree. Then again, it's also a job that you generally need six months to a year to get hired for. Restaurants usually hire from within or hire others with server experience. There's a rhythm to the job that you have to learn or else a server genuinely stands out.
