Another way to look at it is that tipping lubricates the market pricing interface between customers and vendors. If they didn't allow tipping, restaurants would charge more to make up the difference (margins in service work are almost always very low). In a tipping system, when things are going well, everyone tips; if things aren't going so well, not so much. There's some wiggle room between the list price and the actual price, which might offset price stickiness.

Either way, tipping is not an elaborate conspiracy. It might have been long ago, but today, it's just the way service work in the US is organized. If you want to crusade against the injustice of it, that's fine! But make sure your crusade is orthogonal to whether or not you actually tip. :)

> If they didn't allow tipping, restaurants would charge more to make up the difference (margins in service work are almost always very low).

Neither good nor bad.

> In a tipping system, when things are going well, everyone tips; if things aren't going so well, not so much. There's some wiggle room between the list price and the actual price, which might offset price stickiness.

That's terrible! Instead of the burden being spread around, the restaurant still makes money and the employee doesn't!

The restaurant doesn't still make money—the under-tipped employees quit to seek better employment, and at the going wage the employer is offering, there is no further demand for that job to replace the employees who have quit. So fewer employees have to take on the slack of "doing more", and thus each one ends up making roughly as much in tips as before (at equilibrium, if they manage to take up that slack); or they don't manage to take up the slack, demand isn't matched to supply, and the business's total revenue decreases.

The market is efficient... eventually.

>The restaurant doesn't still make money—the under-tipped employees quit to seek better employment, and at the going wage the employer is offering, there is no further demand for that job to replace the employees who have quit.

Is this not true with every company in every industry? Pay is a major reason why people leave a job for another. If an employer is struggling to find labor at a low ball price, they will raise their offer.

> at the going wage the employer is offering, there is no further demand for that job to replace the employees who have quit

That assertion comes out of nowhere...

>>However it frustrates me to no end, that customers are expected to do compensation sharing with the employer

A debate, perhaps worth having. Meanwhile your server makes less than minimum wage because tips are expected to fill in the gap. A while back it was $2.13 an hour. Not giving him a tip is only going to ruin his day, not start a revolution. As of right now, the chicken dish cost $16 plus an unofficial but expected 15-20% tip. Do you have the roughly $20? if not, grab a few slices of pizza.

Edit: I don't tip 20% when I grab a coffee at Dunkin. Oh no. Maybe leave them the loose change.

> I don't tip 20% when I grab a coffee at Dunkin.

Why not? Not a critique, just curious about your rationale when you note that "tips are expected to fill in the gap".

they make probably $10+ an hour and are not considered "tipped" employees, that's way more than a waiter's minimum (used to be $2.13 or so)

Employers pay the difference between tipped and untipped employee wages if the tips + wage don't beat minimum wage.

However in regards to Dunkin Donuts, I'm not sure the employees can even accept or keep any tips themselves. Maybe a Dunkin Donuts regular can comment whether they can accept tips; many franchise restaurants have a no tipping policy.

Employers are supposed to pay the difference, but often don't.

At least at some Dunkins, employees split tips among everyone working, but it stays with the employees.

FYI, While their base is below minimum wage, if their hourly pay with tip does not meet minimum wage, then the employer has to fill in the gap by law. This is also why a lot of restaurants in Seattle force a 20% gratuity now that minimum wage is $15 an hour to reduce the chance that customers skimp on the tip and thus the employer would have to pay out the remaining $15 an hour.

Washington is one of the few states that doesn’t allow employers to pay below minimum wage even to tipped employees. Maybe Seattle is different since its city minimum wage is above the state minimum, but those Seattle waiters aren’t making $3 or whatever pre-tip.

https://www.lni.wa.gov/WorkplaceRights/Wages/Minimum/

It's division of labor. The owner pays for the employee to show up and make the store look open. You pay for the service actually rendered.

Thanks, then I'll bring my own waiter.

At a lot of restaurants, you do bring your own waiter. These also tend to be restaurants with no tipping. Think: McDonalds or Subway.

Isn't this exactly what the article is about?

McDonalds and certainly Subway are more effort to the staff than passing over a pre-packed muffin in a coffee shop.