The New Republic has a piece about a potential movement away from tipping in restaurants.
It’s too soon to know whether The Public Option, a new brewpub set to open in D.C. by early fall, will serve good beer, but it does promise patrons a less awkward experience than its competitors: Customers won’t have to fret over how much money to add to the bill, because waiters won’t accept tips. The Public Option may be part of a trend: Earlier this month, Manhattan’s Restaurant Riki joined a growing list of New York restaurants that don’t take tips. The Public Option’s founder says he hopes the no-tipping policy will encourage a better dynamic among waiters, kitchen staff and customers.
I’ve never found tipping all that awkward. It’s basic math. I usually always tipped 20 percent of the bill. If the service is awful, I’ll usually speak with the manager rather the stiff and leave. Wait staff are often blamed for anything that goes wrong with a meal, when it’s sometimes rarely their fault. If the owner decides to save money by having one waitress handle the entire lunch rush, she’s being set up to fail. She is stressed for the entire shift and winds up making less than she would if she had help. Sure, sometimes waiters suck — the one thing that irks me is when a waiter won’t just admit that they just forgot to put in my table’s order, which is why the meal is so delayed, but the manager deserves to know in order to improve performance. Once, some friends took my wife and I to a favorite local spot and the service was so bad, they were clearly embarrassed for having suggested the place. I explained this calmly to the manager, who wisely didn’t want to lose regular customers, and she was apologetic and comped a round of drinks. I don’t only do this for freebies, though, or to scream and moan. I just value open communication.
Neither the New Republic article nor the one about Restaurant Riki in Manhattan actually mention what the wait staff will make in a no-tipping structure. Legally, it would have to be at least minimum wage, but that’s far less than what a good waitress of waiter could earn. Riki has raised its prices about 15 percent, which would still factor out to less than most wait staff make in tips, and that’s allowing for a direct line from the price increase to the labor compensation.
When I was in Europe, I noticed that tipping is not required because waiters earn a living wage, but interestingly enough, the prices — even in Paris — were about the same as what you’d pay at a similar restaurant in a major U.S. city, and even allowing for the exchange rate, overall meals were cheaper.
I do agree with The New Republic‘s larger point about the bias in tipping. I’ve witnessed it myself and I find it odious when a guy gives an attractive young woman a 50% tip for service equal to what a middle-aged, less conventionally attractive woman provided but in her case, he begrudgingly gave he 15%.
I rarely tip extravagant amounts for this reason. I have when waiters have gone truly above and beyond. I recall truly great and attentive service at my wife’s birthday dinner a few years ago. Those can be tough for waiters because people linger for a while and demand a lot of attention.
Why you can’t afford to live in San Francisco…
I stumbled upon this link online.
After interviewing for a job with the Academy of Art and finding out at the end of the interview that the pay is $13.50/hr, I wrote a nice thank you note: “Thanks for speaking with me today. After looking over my expenses, $13.50 will not be enough for me to live on. The average rent for a one bedroom in San Francisco is $2,897, and $13.50 an hour would only amount to $2,160 per month. Only if you increase the rate to at least the living wage, or offer housing, this will not work for me.”
Her reply: “At this time, the pay rate for the role is $13.50.”
My reply: “I suggest your institution reconsider its priorities. As one of the largest landowners in SF with a real estate portfolio worth at least $320 million, and annual revenues more than $247 million, you would think you could spare enough to pay full time labor enough to afford to live in one of the Academy’s overly priced buildings. Just sayin.”
Greed on both sides of the equation, the landlords and the employers, makes for a citizenry forced to depend on loans and credit which, surprise, just funnels more money into the pockets of the wealthy.
This is not a thank-you note. It’s a snarky entitled rant. I have read my share of snarky entitled rants, and this is one of the snarkier and more entitled ones. But because you didn’t question my sexuality (true story), there might be hope for you.
I’d like to think that I’m better at responding to these types of notes now than I was in my early managerial days. Let’s see..
Your expenses are never your employer’s responsibility. This is why they rarely give raises if you suddenly develop a cocaine or gambling addiction. Your compensation is based solely on your value to the company. Negotiating a salary increase is a vital skill when interviewing, but you should restrict that negotiation to what you can bring to the job (experience, dedication, drive, ambition, and so on) that would warrant spending more on your salary than what they’d pay the many other people they likely interviewed.
I’m not sure what your salary expectations were, but if you hoped to earn enough to afford, on your own, a one-bedroom in San Francisco for $2,897, you’d have to make roughly $120,000. Most landlords like their tenants to have an annual salary of at least 40 times their monthly rent. That’s about four times what you were offered. I want to be fair to your point of view, but I am skeptical that you interviewed for a six-figure position. You applied for a job at the Academy of Art University. Any one of those words in a company name usually means freeze-dried coffee in the break room, but all three combined ensures penury. I’m even skeptical that the person who interviewed you makes six figures. He or she probably lives in Oakland and has a crummy commute (an hour in theory, hour and a half… maybe two in practice).
When I lived in New York, I knew thirtysomething professionals who lived in one-bedroom Manhattan apartments for $2,896. They had “esq.” after their names (and significant law school debt). I am the last person to pretend that $13.50 an hour is a ticket to easy street, but I strongly believe it’s insulting to so many who barely survive to equate access to an apartment in one of the most expensive cities in America to a “living wage.” Those of us who advocate for a “living wage” are thinking more of the single mother who skips dinner herself so her kids don’t go to bed hungry or even has her kids snuggle in bed with her because she can’t afford to leave the space heater running at night.
I checked on Glassdoor, which is not the gospel on these matters but provide some insight, and no one is making six figures at this company. And even if they were, a salary adjustment for your role couldn’t occur in a vacuum. It would mean increasing the salaries of everyone senior to you. And eventually, you’d be back where you started.
By this, I mean: San Francisco is a city where lots of people want to live. The vacancy rate is 4.5 percent. When you have limited supply and increasing demand, real estate prices increase. That’s why more middle income residents are being priced out. Heck, there are bankers living in the Mission. Times have changed, so I don’t think it’s accurate to blame expensive real estate entirely on the “greed” of landlords. Unless you resort to lotteries or some Hunger Games scenario, the only way to cope with demand exceeding supply is to raise prices. This has nothing to do with a living wage.
What’s happening in San Francisco is unfortunate, if not inevitable, and I do believe that economic diversity in a city makes it more vibrant overall. However, ultimately, that’s not your potential employer’s responsibility to fix. I’d like to know what your goal was from the “thank-you note”? If the original response had been worded more professionally and focused more on what you could do for the Academy of Art, you might have persuaded the hiring manager to increase your compensation by a reasonable amount. However, you went for a number well beyond any discretionary range the manager might have had (please note, that anyone who interviews applicants for a $13.50 role is usually not in a position to make drastic alterations to compensation structure).
I have noticed a lot of young, talented people resorting to the “mic drop and swagger off the stage” approach to conflict. This won’t help you professionally. This won’t help you personally. This won’t help you at all. You might get a lot of traffic on your site, but I don’t think those people will hire you.
By the way, did notice a studio in Lower Nob Hill for $1,495. You might want to consider a roommate. If it’s any consolation, I shared a one-bedroom in Manhattan with an assortment of roommates until I was 29 and graduated to a studio with a sloping floor and a wet bar sink and dorm room fridge. And I loved it. It was mine.
Posted by Stephen Robinson on April 3, 2014 in Social Commentary
Tags: Academy of Art University, Living Wage, San Francisco, Tumbler