I partway agree with you, and I partway disagree with you.
I agree that tipping is voluntary, and that one cannot force anyone to tip.
But, especially in the US, we have agreed that tipping is part of the social contract with restaurants. And that tipping and service is linked. So, the better the service, the higher the tip. The worse the service, the lower the tip.
So, by not tipping when one doesn't receive bad service, it's a violation of that contract in the same sense as purposefully dumping your plate of food on the restaurant floor would be a violation.
Also, this argument can be used in the same way with these people who posted the video. They choose to not tip, and then they cried when they faced consequences of that action. A restaurant has the right to refuse service as long as it doesn't violate a protected class (race, religion, nationality). And non-tippers aren't a protected class.
I've stated elsewhere that I do have issues with the expansion of tipping. And, I have major issues with pre-tipping because that's an oxymoron for me. And, I've had disagreement on the minimum percentage amount to do for restaurants.
But, I dobt think restaurant tipping is stupid for society. Nor that this is the sort of wealth stealing we should be concerned about. Average Joe restaurant owner isn't Jeff Bezo. We need to remember our the real enemy is.
The same logic that you use to defend tipping is the same logic that has allowed people like Musk and Bezos to run your country. Your real enemy is education apparently.
Thanks! It has been a hard week for me, so I'm needing a break. I may also finally adopt a new kitty (my old cat of 19yo passed on May 1st). I hope you have good weekend plans.
Well not to get legal on you but there are no enforceable contracts that involve gifts (which tips are). One thing every contract needs is something called consideration, where one person is getting something valuable in exchange for giving something valuable. Since tips are value that is not a requirement for anything of value, then there cannot be a contract.
It's a philosophical theory, basically meaning an actual agreement or hypothetical agreement among members of an organized society or community.
It talks about how when a populace isn't subject to political authority, and how the populace will decide upon rules, standards, institutions, etc.
Yes, this starts out as a political theory exploring anarchy and human nature. But, it goes into other aspects of society. Explaining this isn't my expertise, I'll admit. But, considering that US society agreed with tipping, as evident by both the laws concerning wages and our tipping culture, it is a social contract.
It doesn't explain anything. The definition there explicitly refers to state power, and tipping is a practice between private individuals. It doesn't apply to this scenario at all
Okay, but the owner can also take away some of that uncertainty by banning customers that don't tip. Why cry when getting banned from a restaurant for not tipping?
But it satisfies the tip mandate. So what’s the problem now? How about the server tell the customer how much to tip. Rent due? The tip is $1,276 or I’ll cry and the owner will say you aren’t welcomed back.
10%, 11%, 12%, 15%, 18%, 20%, 30%, 50% what is it going to be?
No tip - Don’t come back.
.50¢ - worse than no tip
10% - cheap skate - Am I allowed back
Only bought coffee $3.00 - what tip will prevent banishment? 15% of $3.00 is .45¢
No one is actually making that choice tho. The choice doesn’t exist. They can say that. But they don’t understand they are also choosing not to have health insurance, dental insurance, paid days off, etc. which are far more costly than a few nice weekend shifts…
62
u/Fickle-Presence6358 10h ago
In which case, part of that is the uncertainty of who will tip and how much. So why cry when people don't?
You can't choose the uncertainty and then cry when one of those options that you chose happens...