Comment by jackptfh | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jackptfh | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Yes, on average the server at the high end restaurant did substantially more work, and they performed it more expertly.

they were better able to answer questions and offer suggestions (including off-menu changes that might help you). They timed your meal for your enjoyment rather than for turnover. They made sure you had fresh silverware, a clean table, and a full glass. They coordinated your bar, wine, and food orders so appropriate items were presented at the appropriate time. They verified the kitchen gave them correct dishes before they brought them to you. They devoted a lot of energy into ensuring that a small number of guests have a great experience.

They're able to earn decent livings because they are at the top of their field.

The folks at chili's are granted no autonomy. Their goal is to turn the table quickly, with the least effort; and to do this with the least skilled staff. They work hard, but their goal is to serve a large number of guests with a tolerable experience, not a great one.

Yes, they bring food and drink, but the focus is on throughput, not on quality.

It's similar to the difference between code written by a low bid contractor versus a talented on-site team. If you want anything unusual or if you care about quality and the experience, you'll greatly prefer the on site staff. Even if some execs might not understand why you can't offshore 100% of the work.

All of these things you describe, fall under what I consider "their job"

Agreed. Where I'm from, if a restaurant or a fast food doesn't satisfy these things (aka doing their job), then I simply don't go there.

So assume that if they (and the back of the house, in the event of tip pooling) were paid a meaningful base wage it would have cost 20% more for the experience of dining at the restaurant. Do a calculation and add that to the check, because that's what you would be paying if we didn't have tip culture.

The thing is... people are okay with that. It's how most every other country works. Americans are paying it anyways, the only difference is sometimes the waiter(ess) gets shafted because the business outsources the responsibility to their customers.

I don't live in a tip culture (not in America), and things seem to move along just fine. There's no shortage of people eating out in restaurants, nor a shortage of wait-staff working there..

That's not the point I was making. The point I was making was if you are so offended by the idea of tipping imagine that:

* If we didn't tip, these experiences cost 20% more. (We can't know whether that's the right number or not, but I think it's a good place to start)

* Now just apply 20% to your check and go on about your day.

This is legitimate advice for a person baffled by tipping -- just pay 20% more and move on. If we lived in a world where that waiter got paid a meaningful wage, that's what you'd be paying.

and part of the compensation package associated with "their job" is tipping.

Your point being?

While I'm not disagreeing that a server at a high end restaurant has substantially more work to do. I'd argue that simply the lower volume of orders and higher level planning by the restaurant managers is a more critical piece here. It's like running on a bespoke finely tuned server versus just trying to use auto scaling cloud services and crossing your fingers.

I agree. I think the reason has to be that you are getting a better level of service and they will have a much lower volume of tables so they need a higher margin per table. (Obviously there are some high volume / high cost restaurants but that isn't the norm.)

That has generally not been my experience... but I have never spent $500 on a meal before, so my experience is with the lower to mid-tier priced establishments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com