In a vacuum that would be fine. But in the current culture that likely wouldn’t overcome the tipping standard/culture and may just drive customers away thinking the prices are too high. Unless you have a huge blatant no tipping sign all over the place.
This isn’t too indigestible as it stands provided the wait staff understand they are likely to only get a tip for excellent service.
But to do this on top of an 11 dollar cannoli. That’s a bit different too. I hope it was like a dozen cannolis.
That sounds just like tipping, but with more steps. And also the resteraunt skimming a chunk of it too I’m sure. 18% service fee so we can pay 8% higher wages.
Basically, they just raised their prices by 18% and blamed it on the greedy, useless employees. I don’t know why businesses bother selflessly “creating jobs” if they are so much trouble. Shouldn’t those be the first things to cut to make their business more efficient under capitalism? Stop doing charity work and run the business yourself.
Basically, they just raised their prices by 18% and blamed it on the greedy, useless employees.
No, it’s worse than that.
Look at how the tips are calculated. They use the base bill of 95.60, not the bill after the service charge has been applied.
If they rolled an 18% increase into their prices, the calculated tip would also rise 18%. But it didn’t.
So in addition to effectively raising their prices and blaming their employees for it, they are also stiffing their employees by low-balling their tip calculations.
Actually, what I’m saying was that there shouldn’t be a need for a tip at all. That 18% service charge is for services rendered outside of the production of the product, meaning the server, cashier, etc. In most countries that’s rolled into the cost of the product, not a separate charge. In the US, that’s paid for through tips instead. What they’re doing is trying to double dip. They want to keep the money that normally would go to paying the service staff a wage without raising advertised prices and also have a separate tip to actually pay them.
This is a classic bait and switch where advertised price is not what you actually pay. Doesn’t matter if they put a little sign to cover their legal obligations, it’s still disingenuous to advertise one price and charge another. Tipping and taxes are common knowledge in the US as being added on after, but a service charge in addition to tipping is not and most people will assume that the service charge is a tip and won’t also tip whereas it doesn’t go directly to the service staff like a tip does. So likely in this place, the service staff just gets their $2.13/hr or whatever the tipped minimum is there, and a few dollars here and there in actual tips but doesn’t get any of that 18% unless tips don’t cover the required hourly $5.12 tip credit.
So they need to choose. Raise your prices for more profit and keep tipping, raise your prices to pay your service staff and do away with tipping, or keep your prices lower and risk tipping not covering the minimum wage tip credit.
I actually support phasing tips out for service fees, less dodgy and less influenced by cognitive biases from customers toward certain genders or ethnicities of staff.
There’s no need for a service fee, just increase the prices of everything by 18% or whatever. It’s more honest that way instead of listing one price and then springing a hidden fee on people at checkout. Part of why this particular example is so dodgy is they seem to be fishing for a service fee and a tip, which just seems like double dipping on hidden fees.
It’s important to require disclosure of the service fee. In my experience usually listed at the bottom of the menu. I know at least in some instances there are crowdsourced master lists of restaurants with hidden fees, and enforcement of disclosure requirements seems to have stepped up.
Wild to me that theres a whole country out there that has so much influence over my life (an entire ocean away) and they don’t know how much their meal will be before the cheque comes. Incredible.
Roll it into the prices then. Any mandatory fee is a cost of doing business, don’t make it look like your food costs less than it really does. Only taxes should be separate.
It’s a USA thing. Other places often have rules that say the price advertised (on menu, website, in store) is the price the customer pays, all fees and taxes included.
Yeah in Australia restaurants are allowed to have a service fee only if it’s applied on select days (e.g. weekends and public holidays, but not every single day of the week) and they clearly display the conditions of the service fee “at least as prominently as the most prominent price on the menu”. Otherwise, they have to roll in any fees into the main advertised price.
I would simply not go to that restaurant anymore and very plainly let them know why. This is greed and I will not reward it.
Much like when I place a to go order and go pick up the order and the POS (point of sale not piece of shit if you’re wondering) system pops up that tip screen. You didn’t do anything worthy of a tip so I will not be tipping you. Now if for example when I get there they apply some discount I wasn’t aware of that makes my bill cheaper, I’ll tip for that. Throw in some extra cheese sauce, tip. Anything above and beyond, tip. Just ring me up and hand me my food, yeah no tip.
You realize that giving you 5% off so you will tip 15% is still greed though right? The greed is always there, it’s just your perception of how it’s delivered. We expect a little foreplay with our greed.
It’s this (the service charge) or they raise prices across the menu. Some people prefer this, some people prefer the added cost baked in.
Personally I think the service charge is a little deceptive because you are hit with an unexpected expense at the end of your meal. Even if they’re very up front about the charge most people won’t be automatically calculating the 18% extra on whatever they’re spending, they’re just going to look at the price on the menu.
They have raise prices across the menu, by 18% to be more specific.
Segregating the price increase as “service fee” is only so that they can deceitfully advertise their prices a lower than they really are, a form of Consumer Fraud (I believe this one is a form of Bait & Switch)
Not quite. A $100 meal would have a routine 15%, $15 tip. Increase the price 18%, and a $118 meal would have an expected 15%, $17.70 tip.
Look at the tip calculations on this receipt: they are based on the price of the meal before the service fee. If this restaurant sold a $118 meal, it’s expected 15% tip would be $15, not $17.70.
They are stealing $2.70 from staff on every $100 check.
I feel like I have seen multiple receipts from this same place, likely posted by the same person, because I remember noting $16 Kids Shells on some other thread months ago.
This has been happening in Florida for a few years now. Restaurant owners went to court so they could keep the service charge. In the beginning I thought it was just a mandatory tip to stop people from stiffing the waiter. Nope they actually expect you to pay 18% plus another 20% for the waiter. Ridiculous. We don’t go out to eat much anymore on principle.
It’s cuz they’re too chicken shit to actually raise the menu price. So they can blame the government or the workers instead of taking responsibility for paying their staff shit wages forever
I imagine if it’s not disclosed clearly before you order, you can dispute it with your bank/cc company. If it is, and you still decide to give that company business, then I guess that’s on you.
While I absolutely hate this, I will note the suggested tip is lower than what is usually asked for.
It would be better to have two tip lines on the receipt; one for front staff, one for back staff.
Edit: I’m just going to put a PS here as people seem to me missing my point (and the first 5 words). I’m not recommending this practice. I was suggesting an improvement on a shitty thing. My initial point is that: I’m honestly surprised that they DIDN’T have the audacity to recommend no less than a 15% tip.
The suggested tip may be less than what's normally suggested, but even the 'minimum' 8% tip means it adds up to a total of 26%, which is way more than my own usual 20%.
Paying for servers based off of the price of the food just doesn’t make sense to me. If I order a super expensive caviar and super expensive bottle of wine the staff would be paid more than another server with large party that only orders inexpensive drinks. The second server would be paid less for doing more work.
I think they should just be paid a decent wage for doing their job well despite what the customer decided to order.
On a side note if the server has to do something like prepare a salad table side or flambé a dessert they should get a bonus for doing that.
at a lot of places tips are split between front and back of house and those tips are based on the price of the meal, not the “tip” that was given. This results in many servers losing money and having to pay coworkers out of their own pocket on big groups or expensive bills that either don’t tip at all or only tip something like 10%.
I’m not advocating for this system at all, I just wanted to share some more info on how/why tipping works the way it does (in the US at least).
It’s a tip pool. So for instance I serve a meal to a couple. The meal is $50. They tip 10%. That split means I pay (for instance) the bartender out of the $5 tip $2.50. If I get another table that orders drinks and tips nothing I end up splitting nothing. But if I work with 4 other back of house people and they each get an equal percentage of that $5 then I get a dollar. But then that dollar is taxed because tips are taxed. If the company has a policy for shares tips pooling I could legitimately make $100 in tips and not receive $100 in tips. Technically that would be receiving negative tips because what is earned vs what is paid out is so drastically different.
In addition I’ve experienced back of house workers (cooks) getting paid out of the tip pool but the brunt of tax on the tips is not paid by them. This is absolutely tax fraud. But I’d also argue that tip pools are a form of wage theft and companies that engage in one are way more likely to engage in the other.
That isn’t negative tips. The lowest you can make in tips is $0. Even when tip pooling, the lowest you can make is $0, which requires no tips what so ever to have been given. There is no 100% tax rate, and you are at no point ever paying into the tip pool out of your own pocket.
I understand what you’re saying. But for a person who is now down from $5 to $2.50 to a $100 that is then taxed you’re effectively making less money than you earned. That’s why you can have negative net even while making take home pay.
But think about what might happen if the bill is paid incorrectly in cash. The company will absolutely take cash tips to compensate in the event that you or someone else messed up when counting the cash or giving change or whatever. With tip pools it’s unlikely. But it has happened.
It’s technically tax fraud, but yes. You could be. Back of house staff can include managers, cooks and dish washers, and even the hostess. Those people aren’t paid the $2.75 to $3.75 that the wait staff are paid. They’re considered hourly employees and they fall under different pay requirements under the law. A business that doesn’t augment the amount of pay for wait staff not making the federal minimum wage ($7.25) an hour in tips, that business is committing wage theft. To then be paying non-wait staff out of the wait staff tips is illegal as part of the wage theft. But since the company is already committing wage theft there’s no reason not to commit tax fraud to cover up the wage theft.
Apparently Federal Law sort invalidates the legality of a tip pool altogether because the tip only counts as a tip if the person who tips determines who the tip is given to and how much and it’s non compulsory. But a lot of places ignore that as well.
I worked as a server at olive garden many years ago. They famously had their soup, salad, and breadsticks deal for like $6 something. People would run us ragged getting more of each thing. And we’d be lucky to get a $1 or 2 because the price was so low, but it was vastly more work than regular food.
I think they should just be paid a decent wage for doing their job well despite what the customer decided to order
Where I live, there’s no separate minimum wage for tipped positions. It’s the same as the regular minimum wage. Even so, it’s still customary to tip, but just for some jobs. It’s never made sense to me that it’s customary to tip a Doordash driver but not a casual FedEx or UPS employee when the latter likely has more work to do and stricter deadlines to do it.
Do you want corporate efforts to reduce delivery driver wages and processes to demand you pay their wages through delivery tips? Because I am sure are ready to go on this endeavor as soon as you want.
As far as I know, some of the casual/seasonal drivers (extra delivery drivers for holiday deliveries) don’t get paid much more than minimum wage. I’m not talking about the unionized employees.
My overall point was that there’s many jobs that get paid minimum wage, so why are only some of them tipped? It would be more consistent to either be all tipped, or not tipped.
If I can’t afford without the service charge, I can’t afford it with the service charge. Either way I’m lying to myself to justify it. Either the meal is worth it or it isn’t.
Restaurants have notoriously thin margins. I’m not defending this bill, and there are definitely awful practices out there, but it ain’t easy. Even a $34 dollar steak only kind of covers all the ancillary costs that make it happen.
The biggest issue with the crunch we have going on is that food (prepared or otherwise) should be way more expensive, and that shouldn’t be an issue because most people should be making way more money. All of those should/shouldn’ts got way out of whack over the course of decades, and the circus only continued because people found crappy ways to keep it going.
It’s a lot of industries. Construction is a great example. The developers make money. The material vendors make money. The builders make money. The sub contractors who actually put the parts together get haggled on invoices and take the lower amount because they have payroll to make and equipment loans to pay. Loans that are happily given out because the equipment can be easily repossessed.
It’s a very good thing everything is correcting, but it’s going to be an ugly process as workers get their due and pass the burden on to the small business owners.
I worked at a pizza shop way back ages ago (early 2000’s), but I think the formula is generally the same. Food costs they would shoot for 33%, labor ended up being around 33%, the rest was overhead for the facility (rent, AC, etc) and profit.
I think that’s actually a pretty fair amount of profit in that. But that was almost 20 years ago. I feel like the formula is likely similar though.
So way late, but no that’s shifted a lot. This is anecdotal but does speak to a lot of industries: my understanding is that pizza shops now live or die by cheese prices.
Labor, while fluctuating, doesn’t move a ton month to month. Dairy can.
That’s like I said anecdotal, but broadly, real-estate, equipment purchase/finacince has all been so hyper optimized it squeezes the business owners out.
It doesn’t matter the market. PIZZAOVEN-XL will sell it to you, let you leverage payments against your home equity, grab it back and resell it. They can deal with the cash flow issue. They are “assembled in America”. They don’t care if you go out of business. They’ll do it again for the same person that moves into the same space trying to do the. Exact. Same. Thing.
And I’m not trying to draw a blanket statement across all industries. I’m just saying the wheels that make every industry move are smarter and literally longer lived than anyone starting out, and there’s a reason “John deer” and “John deer finance” are seperate companies.
Cheap sub contractors need so much constant control to make sure things are delivered on spec that it is almost like it costs more than to hire the more expensive company with a reputation for solid work
Saw exactly this when I was doing commissioning for a large municipality. No matter how tight the specs were, some of these knuckleheads would do it their own way and get mad when we forced them to do it right.
Some of them would just claim bankruptcy if the mistake was big enough.
Pro-tip, friends: don’t pick the lowest cost of construction bids, I guaran-fucking-tee it’ll cost you more than you saved. And, anyone who says they “meet code” is really saying they do the bare minimum required.
Assuming restaurants have the same overhead as any other business: rent, staff, insurance, maybe equipment (manufacturing, etc.), what else?
They don’t have expenses like vehicles, tariffs on imported goods, the cost to fly staff out for conferences, tech costs, and so on.
The only difference is the product they bring in, and the product they put out.
As a consumer, who doesn’t get the benefit of industry discounts or high-volume prices, making food is really inexpensive.
When I see a restaurant, for example, selling pasta with marinara sauce for $15-20 a plate, I’m curious to know why they have to beg to cover costs. You can make the same dish for a family of four for under $3, and save $100 you’d spend getting the same dish at a restaurant.
So, again, if the cost of ingredients allows for such a significant markup, well beyond what most other businesses are able to get away with, why are restaurants having to charge “service fees” on top of tips?
It’s the behind the scenes that cause a lot of the markup. There might be only two or three food service providers in your area. Food Service Company A has the same prices as Food Service Company B and C. There is no real competition to force prices down for restaurants.
If you are a franchise restaurant, you have to pay franchise fees, buy your all products from the franchise, work within the certain parameters, etc. There is no real way to find ways to drive down prices since your prices are set by the franchise through the prices of the product, corporate oversight, etc.
So I’m stretching it a bit because at the end of the day this really does apply to more than restaurants, but the other commenter had it right.
Things like rent, insurance, etc go into the cost for well above the plate. So the ingredients are one thing, but you have to make up the cost of rent, paying the staff when there’s low customer volume, all the insane amount of costs that go into running a business. That server has to make up for the cost of printing menus and delivering them by mail.
None of this is the servers fault, who should get a fair wage, but it all adds up in a way that makes it hard for the owner. In fact, the person who sold them the grills, refrigerators, and all the other equipment, knows exactly and empirically how hard it is and sets their prices accordingly.
And it’s not like that company’s delivery drivers, techs, and fabrication workers also don’t deserve a wage. Or the Tyson folks that are plucking the chicken delivered.
The issue is, at the end of the day, those companies probably should be less profitable. But instead of accepting that, we put all of the companies that make all the stuff that run that restaurant into bigger companies that are now part of mutual funds, and they sell it out knowing they can grab it back if it goes under.
So you might be able to get away with making a few plates and some money, but trying turning it into something that will let you pay your rent and put your kids into a school. “Bob’s Burgers” is pretty true to life.
This is how to tell someone you haven’t checked grocery prices lately without actually telling them you haven’t checked grocery prices lately. A box of mediocre pasta alone is going to cost you $1.75. A jar of Preggo will run you another 2.50. So 4.25 for an I hate life spaghetti and marinara meal.
The sauce they make probably doesn’t come out of a jar of reconstituted tomato paste and dried seasonings either.
If you buy decent ingredients you are looking at $3 for the pasta and $9 for the sauce. Or $12 for an “ok for a home cook” spaghetti meal with no protein.
Restaurant serving sizes (for better or worse) are usually 2x+ larger than you would serve at home. Rent isn’t free for the restaurant either. Or labor. Or utilities. Or equipment. Etc. General rule of thumb is that a restaurant needs to charge 3x raw food costs to cover expenses.
So your I hate life pasta would need to be priced at $6.50 and your ok for home but not something I would be happy with getting at a restaurant pasta would need to be priced at $18.
This is how to tell someone you haven’t checked grocery prices lately without actually telling them you haven’t checked grocery prices lately.
I’m going to assume you don’t cook at home.
No restaurant worth eating at buys packaged pasta, or packaged bread/buns, or canned sauce.
Flour is cheap, like really cheap. If a restaurant is buying real ingredients, then they are spending pennies and charging tens of dollars.
Restaurant serving sizes (for better or worse) are usually 2x+ larger than you would serve at home.
I highly disagree. I’ve never left a restaurant “full”, even after spending enough to buy a months worth of real food ingredients.
Rent isn’t free for the restaurant either. Or labor. Or utilities. Or equipment. Etc. General rule of thumb is that a restaurant needs to charge 3x raw food costs to cover expenses.
This I agree with. Is rent, labor, equipment at a restaurant significantly more than other places of work? Paying min wage doesn’t exactly eat through your margins.
I think that’s the most surprising part. With how greedy they seem, I would have expected the tip recommendations to be based on the subtotal or total.