Waitstaff shouldn’t have to grovel for their wages.
Legal Seafoods, the iconic Boston restaurant chain that says it isn’t a chain, is caught up in lawsuits brought by waiters and bartenders. They’re upset that some of their tips were used to pay staffers who roll cutlery into napkins, a seeming violation of Massachusetts’s restrictive laws on tip pooling. But there’s an easy solution, one that would be better for waitstaff, an improvement for customers, and even good for the company’s bottom line: Ban tipping altogether. Even better, Legal can do this on its own — no government permission necessary — and perhaps the non-chain might even spark its own revolution, helping to get rid of an antiquated custom that never should have been adopted in the first place.
Ban tipping, you ask? But isn’t tipping necessary “to insure promptitude” (the phrase that’s the alleged origin of the word)?
Not at all. Perhaps that argument could be made if we tipped at the beginning of a meal, waving around, say, a couple of 20s and saying to a waiter, “This could be yours, if. . . ” But that’s not what we do. We tip when we pay the check. Leave 10 percent or 25 percent, it doesn’t matter. The meal is already over; the servers have already done their jobs. Perhaps if you’re a frequent customer and you always get the same waiter, a good tip from the last visit might get you extra attention the next time around. But waitstaff turn over frequently, most of us go to a variety of restaurants and, anyway, it’s hard to remember names, faces, and tipping patterns during a dinnertime rush.
In truth, waiters will treat you well for the same reason that every other non-tipped worker treats you well: That’s their job and they take pride in their work. If not, just leave a comment on Yelp.
Michael Lynn, professor of food and beverage management at Cornell University, has made a career studying tipping. His research shows that the quality of service itself has far less influence on tip size than does, say, writing “Thank you” on checks. Tipping pushes waiters to upsell, often to customers’ detriment. It puts waitstaff in conflict with other workers. And waiters learn to stereotype customers, figuring out that some (e.g., well-dressed, white middle-age men) tip better than others (such as seniors). Tipping, in effect, encourages discrimination.
Indeed, tipping is enshrined in law. The federal minimum wage of $7.25 doesn’t apply to waitstaff; for them the minimum non-tip wage is just $2.13 (in Massachusetts it’s $2.63).
Scott’s argument from a century ago still resonates. Why treat differently those who serve us? Your enjoyment of a meal at a restaurant depends upon far more than your table-side waiter. Chefs and cooks, bussers, cleaning staff, management, and even those who roll napkins profoundly affect your experience. It is tradition, not logic, that keeps tipping in place. It’s a tradition that should be cast aside.
Some restaurants have. California restaurateur Jay Porter is perhaps the most vocal proponent of banning tipping. “I got rid of gratuities at my restaurant, and our service only got better,” he wrote last year. By adding an 18 percent service charge to each bill, he was able to increase waiter compensation to $25 an hour and pay kitchen workers more. With all employees under the same compensation structure, everyone now focused on customer satisfaction. Customers and staff were happier; Porter’s restaurant did better too.
The restaurant industry in general clings to the idea of tipping, seeing it as a way to reduce its costs. But the savings it thinks it obtains are largely an illusion. Waitstaff — almost alone among all workers — shouldn’t have to grovel for their wages. Treat them and pay them like the professionals they are.
This column was first published in The Boston Globe on December 2, 2014.