A restaurant bill making the rounds in the antisocial media:
More and more I am a believer of no tipping and that waitstaff should be paid on an hourly basis with no tips.
Here is where I have issues with this added fee, the first one is: I have no idea which pocket that money truly goes. Does it go to the workers indeed or management keeps a share of it because it is for ALL the employees?
Second: I find suspicious that you could not simply add a few cents here and there to different menu offerings to make up for that 18%. If you have people coming to your restaurant dumb enough to pay $6 for lemonade, you can kick that to at least $6.50 and they won’t care. And $4.00 for a chocolate chip cooking better come with a lap dance or at least a titty rub, but it does not so go ahead and push that puppy to $5 because the dunce at the table won’t know the difference. My guess is that the restaurant is having a lot of competition and at the same time is probably located in a Woke area so it is caught between Liberalism and having to make a filthy capitalist profit to remain afloat.
The question for me is, do I tip if presented with a bill like this? My usual starting point for good service is 20%, but since they are already charging 18%, that means a measly 2% is all they should get although I would go to 5% but only to make it easier to calculate in my head. If I hear any complaints from the staff, I will cheerfully remind them that they are already collection a living wage as per the bill and that if they want some more money, the staff should unionize and strike till better pay is achieved.
Hey, it is not my business, right? Eat the rich!
I wouldn't tip, given that.
And the easiest way to not have to deal with it again, is to not eat there again.
Unless that charge is clearly and visibly displayed, or verbally informed, prior to ordering, yeah, I would be contacting the manager and not paying that 'fee;. Then there would be zero tip for the reasons you noted and a some low online reviews. Nevermind never eating there again.
Wonder how much money they end up losing from that policy? Does it make up for the ones that just blindly pay?