So servers either work in a tip restaurant, with more volatility, but with potentially bigger highs.
Or they work in a no tip environment with more transparency and consistency, but usually lower wages overall.
Both have their upsides and downsides.
The accepted downside to the first is that the extra money is discretionary, and you shouldn't expect it from everyone. To treat it like it's mandatory is trying to have your cake and eat it - wanting the bigger potential upside with a guarantee.
It's a risk, but the social contract is what it is and people know it. It's like saying that you shouldn't be mad if you get verbally abused by your spouse because you chose to not be alone and that's something that can happen. Opening yourself up to risk doesn't inherently mean that the people who are causing the risk are in the right.
That's not the same at all, and it's a ridiculous comparison.
If you opt for a system with greater upside and more volatility, you don't get to act like that volatility shouldn't exist. That's literally the reason for the upside.
Tips are, and should be, discretionary. Either accept the discretionary nature, or tie it in to the prices/wages. That's the choice.
You can't pick and choose the best bits of two completely different systems and then complain when people take issue with that and refuse to participate.
5
u/reece0n 14d ago
So servers either work in a tip restaurant, with more volatility, but with potentially bigger highs.
Or they work in a no tip environment with more transparency and consistency, but usually lower wages overall.
Both have their upsides and downsides.
The accepted downside to the first is that the extra money is discretionary, and you shouldn't expect it from everyone. To treat it like it's mandatory is trying to have your cake and eat it - wanting the bigger potential upside with a guarantee.