×
I hate tipping. Hate it at bars, hate it at restaurants. At the latter, I can never quite bring myself to vary my tip downwards (I also go around 20 percent), and at the former, I don't understand, at all, why someone handing me a can of PBR requires a dollar in additional compensation. Of course, you have to tip, because it's a crucial part of waiter and bartender compensation. As restaurants have realized that tipping is de rigeur, they have adjusted base compensation of their employees downward, expecting patrons to pick up the slack. So to forgo the tip is essentially to dock their pay. But I'd be interested to know: If there was no such thing as tipping, would average employee compensation end up higher or lower? Or would the mean stay the same, but there'd be less variation? In other words, does tipping mean that waiters and bartenders get a better deal than they would otherwise, or does it allow employers to give them a worse deal and use the occasional success stories to pass low pay off as a personal failure? Are there any studies on this sort of thing?(Image used under a Creative Commons license from Flickr user Romanlily.)