Mandatory 16% tip at new Earls 67 locations (Stephen Ave)

[para transit fellow]

I'm in!

16% is a better deal that the 20-25% I usually tip

[NuclearFart]

Too bad they got rid of the big fountain outside the tin palace. It was always highly amusing when kids would buy dish detergent from the adjacent Safeway and dump a ton of it in there.

[topfiverecords]

So if I get terrible service and horrible food will there be a 16% discount button when I go to pay?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

So if I get terrible service and horrible food will there be a 16% discount button when I go to pay?

Well horrible food is a given and terrible service is damned near guaranteed.

[para transit fellow]

^^^ you mean like how much one should reduce the tip if you don't get your side of ranch dressing?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Don't think anyone is concerned with the amount you're forced to tip as any self respecting person will tip at least that much with good service.

It's that there is now no incentive for servers to give good service.

And if you don't get good service, you now have to pick a fight with the manager to voice your displeasure - which most people won't do.

Though, as others have noted, 16% is less than I usually tip these days, so it would actually save me a bit of money and cost the serving staff a bit.

[sun]

In a perfect world, there would be no tipping. Since this isn't a perfect world, I think this is the best alternative. You can't build it into the cost of the food, because we're not used to seeing those prices on the menus and we might not set foot in the joint.

Those who say this "defeats the purpose" I think are wrong. I tip the same amount every time, no matter the service, and I think most probably do the same. 15% or 20% being fairly average. Tipping lost its meaning ages ago. "To insure promptness", my ass.

As an aside, my wife used to work there way back (used to be called Fuel, right?) and made pretty good money. Says she'd be fine with this change as a server, as it guarantees 16% - some nights were better, some were worse. Of course, she's not taking into account that she'd have to claim it as income.

As I understood it, the servers already paid out the kitchen/bar a standard percentage. So, if someone bailed on their bill, or tipped poorly (sub 8%?), the server had to pay out of pocket to cover that kitchen/bar percentage. Always thought that was pretty bogus and this solves that as well.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by rain_e

I'm quite disappointed they switched back. The US beef was a better product and you could tell.

No it wasn't. Earls buys 2 cuts and one of those is ground beef. If you preferred the corn feed american beef just sprinkle a little sugar on your meal and you'll be fine.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by rain_e

I'm quite disappointed they switched back. The US beef was a better product and you could tell.

do tell.

[Philly06Cup]

Like.

Would want more restaurants to switch to a built in service charge. Would want society to move away from the current broken tipping model of "it's not mandatory but everyone should tip". Busty waitresses at busy bars are overcompensated; back-room employees are undercompensated. It needs a serious overhaul.

Don't understand the outrage.

[jeffman]

Why don't they just raise the price and institute no tipping allowed

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by jeffman

Why don't they just raise the price and institute no tipping allowed

What's the difference to you?

16% increase in all menu items, or a 16% fee.

Is it perception? Some sort of psychological block? I actually don't know, maybe you can explain to me.

[Yanda]

Dont know how this will effect me, my roommate works at that location and there behind on rent as it is...

[#-3]

I would support this if they didn't call it tipping, just raised their prices and informed customers tipps are neither required or expected. Freakonomics did a good episode on this not long ago.

[sun]

Originally Posted by jeffman

Why don't they just raise the price and institute no tipping allowed

Because we are a stupid people and we can't do math. If we look at a menu and see a burger for $17.25 and there is a mandatory 16% tip, we just think the burger is $17.25+tip. If we see a burger is $20 with no tipping allowed, we'll think "that's too expensive, it's $17.25 down the street at Joey's" and go there instead.

Sure, it's the same thing, but $20 appears more expensive and how things appear is how we make our decisions (which is why the burger would actually be $19.99, which is also why I made it $20 in my example).

[btimbit]

Yet people still whine. Isn't this just giving people exactly what they want? Got rid of tipping and making it a flat rate every single time?

Besides, as I make sure to mention in every tipping thread, keep in mind that every restaurant in North America that gets rid of tips completely has failed with a year. Simply getting rid of it completely would be shooting themselves in the foot. People would get scared off by the higher menu prices. It's been proven time and time again.


Here's what I want to know, are the tips still going to be getting paid out as cash, or is this now going to wind up on their paycheques, in a roundabout way to compensate staff for the new minimum wage increase? If so I have to give them credit, that's kind of clever. Don't need to raise the menu price and scare away customers that way, especially if other restaurants do raise prices. Earls comes away looking like a cheaper option

Originally Posted by Barnes

No it wasn't. Earls buys 2 cuts and one of those is ground beef. If you preferred the corn feed american beef just sprinkle a little sugar on your meal and you'll be fine.

Yes it was.

[Philly06Cup]

Airlines did it with their crazy fee and tax structure. Government had to step in and regulate.

Would love government to regulate that stated prices on menus are the final price to the consumer.

[foshizzle11]

This is silly, doesn't help their cause at all. I wonder who came up with this decision and if it will affect business like the beef thing did.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by GGG

Good news,

They can't just raise menu prices and ban tipping because people are stupid and do math. Which is more expensive a $17 item or a $20 item with tip included.

People will feel that the menu looks expensive and not eat there.

Also tipping does nothing to improve service. maximizing throughout maximizes tips as the % difference between good tips and bad tips is minimal. And giving better service to people does not correlate with good tips.

Also people who tend to tip on service are less severe versions of springs1 where it's either tipping on how attractive the waitress is or how well their key dances.

Everything posted here is correct.

Before anyone comments further about any perceived correlation between tipping and quality of service, I highly suggest you read this series of articles from a San Diego restaurateur. He ran two establishments, one with a traditional tipping model and one with a no tipping/mandatory service charge model. In this series of blog posts, he comments extensively about why tipping is flawed and should be replaced with the service charge model.

Link to Part 1: http://jayporter.com/dispatches/obse...rt-1-overview/

Excerpt from Part 3:

Probably the most common reaction to our service-charge-no-tips policy, from people outside the service industry, was along the lines of, if there’s no tipping, then how will the servers be motivated to do a good job?

When you step back and think about this for a second, it’s actually kind of hilarious. The person asking this question would have a full-time job as a software developer, or lawyer, or journalist, or doctor, always working to a pay rate that was negotiated ahead of time. We would never suggest that a code jockey or surgeon would be motivated to do better work by the thought that their clients, if pleased with the service, might toss in a few extra dollars.

And yet, we restaurant-goers (and I include myself in this, in the days before I worked in restaurants) are not hesitant to suggest that, unlike all other working Americans, restaurant servers are a class of simpletons who require a drip of money every few minutes to keep them on task. By perpetuating the idea that servers, and servers alone, won’t perform without the threat of pay withheld, we dehumanize our neighbors and peers who work taking care of us. I think this helps us not feel bad when we sometimes treat them badly. It’s the Stanford Prison Experiment meets Yelp.

Meanwhile, restaurant workers know what’s up. People who worked in the restaurant industry wouldn’t ask us this question — what will motivate servers to do a good job? Because, inside the restaurant, we know that while the customers think their tips allow them to control the server, in fact the control is illusory. The story of the server being motivated by the customer’s power to tip, is instead a fiction created to make the customer feel important.

This was one of the first things I learned as a restauranteur.

[btimbit]

That article always gets posted in threads like these MarchHare, and while it does have some fantastic points (specifically the part about people trying to use tipping as an attempt at control of their server), it is worth mentioning that it didn't work.

That guy actually got fined for "unfair competition and making untrue or misleading representations about pricing". He was doing exactly what this Earls as doing, except he was trying to hide it, and was charging an additional 18%.

In 2013, despite very good reviews, the restaurant failed, was sold and closed. Wasn't profitable