zlacker

>>helsin+(OP)
I have spent < an year in US (mostly in California) and found the America behaviour to be very polite in speech but indifferent/mean in actions. The passive aggressive behavior seemed quite common.

As an outsider sometimes you are not aware of cultural norms, but I always felt the margin for error for what Americans considered "acceptable" was too narrow. There was no benefit of doubt, and sometimes an explicit dislike for someone who did not immediately fit in.

>>jatins+a3
This is something I noticed as well, and in more general terms, the importance put in the States on the appearances. For example, from what I've read here many US Americans are quick to point out that tipping culture is essential for giving you an always smiling waiter, while for me it's more important to know whether behind that smile there's a big "fuck you". I'd rather have an invisible waiter sticking with doing their job of serving people. Not that I don't like smiles, but I appreciate sincerity more.

>>soco+i5
tipping isn’t important in order to get a smile, it’s important because it’s a critical part of their wage. And yeah, if they do their job decently and you take that away, they’ll be upset (as you would too).

It’s a terrible custom in most ways but I don’t think you got a good explanation.

>>ethanb+78
Their argument was in favor of keeping the tipping culture, as in not paying them the real wage because you'd lOsE ThAt sMiLe (as forced as it might be). Yes, I find this terrible as well.

>>soco+yj
who is "their" argument?

everyone knows its a ploy to make the servers work harder and obfuscate true costs of the meal.

>>red-ir+tx
Isn't there a tax incentive for the waiters to get their wage in time rather than salary?

After all, waiters could just refuse this system and they would get a normal salary like they do in Europe.

>>Brando+i22
In general it’s unwise to draw parallels between Europe and the US on the topic of labor protections.

>>ethanb+CB3
Yes I know. The thing is that I read somewhere that tips are easier on the taxes so it is not obvious that the staff wants to get rid of them. I may be mistaken,,or have a false memory, though.

This said, it is such a global thing in the US (specifically for waiters) that I do not understand why there isn't more pushback if this is a problem for everyone (except the restaurant owners)

>>Brando+4D3
I don't think it directly has to do with taxes as much as take-home pay. Waiters are paid very little (below the minimum wage, which is itself unlivable), so the idea of "get rid of tips" is not usually accompanied by "and triple/quadruple their hourly wage."

FWIW there are more and more restaurants in the US (especially high-end ones) that have gotten rid of tipping but this is a labor-friendly decision made by management and puts the restaurant at a menu-price disadvantage to its competitors.

>>ethanb+884
> Waiters are paid very little (below the minimum wage, which is itself unlivable)

Is there a legal anchor to this? I was under the impression that "minimum wage" is a salary they must be paid or otherwise it is illegal to employ someone (at least this is how the minimum wage works in France)

>>Brando+wO4
Basically the hourly wage for tipped workers can be (and almost always is) below the minimum wage but if they don't hit the minimum wage in tips, then the remainder must be paid directly as a wage by the employer.

So if you earn $5/hr and minimum wage is $10/hr, you are guaranteed $10/hr but if you are receiving tips then the remaining $5 comes from your tips. If you do not, the remaining $5 comes from your employer.

However, a lot of tipped workers earn well over the minimum wage when you include tips. So if the proposal is: "let's get rid of tips and then you can get minimum wage," that's obviously not desirable. What would be more palatable is getting rid of tips and raising the minimum wage closer to what they earn with tips, which is really more a problem with the abysmal minimum wage than it is with tipping per se.