I was banned from Murphy's Taproom

[Mike Barskey]

or you could go crazy and give the cute waitress that 20% she deserves for that sweet smile

If sweet smiles got tips, Mike would be walking out of there with more money than he came with.

Aww, shucks. [kicks an invisible rock on the ground in front of him] Now I'm smiling!

Really, though, that was hilarious.

[mackler]

Ok, two quick points.

I hadn't really thought about it before but as someone pointed out, it doesn't take any longer to serve filet than tuna. Why should the filet guy pay more for the same service? That is, the percentage idea seems odd. It's even more pronounced when ordering drinks. If you're ordering draft beer and the next guy is ordering shots of Johnny Walker Blue, well he got liquor that was 10-15x as good (and as expensive) but I doubt he got service that was 10x as good. Maybe two or three times as good?

Also as noted, will there be a special menu for those who state that their policy is to always tip 10% or 5%?

For some reason, the phrase "from each according to his ability" comes to mind.

[Ryan McGuire]

Do you pay the 8% meal tax when you eat out?  It's not included in the prices on (most) menus.

I do because it is in the pre-agreed-upon contract; even if it's not in the menu price, it is posted in NH law that the government adds tax to dine-out expenses.

NH law is not a pre-agreed-upon contract by me, nor Mike if I assume correctly. However, menus typically do have a line at the bottom saying that all food is subject to a NH 8% meal tax. It's not the law itself that makes it required of me to pay it, its the fact that its written in the menu.

As for tipping in general, I agree with Ian that Mike just needs to learn a bit of compassion. Tipping is a very rewarding (for both parties!) convention and although I agree with Mike that it is not based on written, formal, contracts, it is more of a "gentleman's agreement". I for one would never want to live in a society that had to have every single expectation of business transactions written down in a formal contract (Ever seen the movie "Brazil"?). I believe that society can, and *does*, operate very well on preconceptions and traditions. I fully support anyone that wishes to do away with these customs, but they do so at their own peril of ostracism.

[error]

Well, I'm glad to see the issue resolved, one way or the other.

Replacing the tip with a service charge is not unheard of, even if uncommon here, so this resolution seems quite reasonable to me.

[Mike Barskey]

NH law is not a pre-agreed-upon contract by me, nor Mike if I assume correctly. However, menus typically do have a line at the bottom saying that all food is subject to a NH 8% meal tax. It's not the law itself that makes it required of me to pay it, its the fact that its written in the menu.

That's a good point. I don't care much about what the law says. My point, though, is that being taxed by government is not a tradition - it is documented, specific, and enforced by violence. Tipping is none of those.

Tipping is a very rewarding (for both parties!) convention and although I agree with Mike that it is not based on written, formal, contracts, it is more of a "gentleman's agreement". I for one would never want to live in a society that had to have every single expectation of business transactions written down in a formal contract (Ever seen the movie "Brazil"?).

I have found it not rewarding. If you are using that as reason to tip, does that excuse me from tipping?

I also would not want to live in a society that had to have every single expectation of business transactions written down in a formal contract. I Did use the word "contract" in the above quote, but you can see that I was not referring to a written-down formal contract; I was referring to the charge, written in the menu by the owner, as the terms of an agreement for any customer to buy the food. "I sell hamburgers for $7.00. If you want a burger, you must pay me $7.00. Also, the government forces me to add tax."

I believe that society can, and *does*, operate very well on preconceptions and traditions.

I also think society can and does operate very well on preconceptions and traditions. That does not mean that all preconceptions and traditions work very well (or at all). It also does not mean that society wouldn't work better without those preconceptions and traditions (I'm not saying it would work better without them, but it is logically possible, and examples of possibilities have been given).

I fully support anyone that wishes to do away with these customs, but they do so at their own peril of ostracism.

Yup. So do I. And yup, I do it at the peril of being ostracized for it.

[Ryan McGuire]

Tipping is a very rewarding (for both parties!) convention....

I have found it not rewarding. If you are using that as reason to tip, does that excuse me from tipping?

Absolutely! The only valid reason to tip is because you see it as rewarding. "Reward" as I mean it though takes on the following forms, listed in order of importance:

• The relationship of good-will built between consumer (literally ) and server
• The amount of control it gives me in the transaction (as opposed to a flat rate regardless of service quality)
• The knowledge that you won't be ostracized for not tipping. (This might better be defined as a deterrent rather than a reward, it all depends on how you look at it)

The same consequence of ostracism goes for Keith too. He can ban you (I know he's clarified that he hasn't), but he does so at his own peril of ostracism. I can't say I feel too badly about the situation though and I will continue to go to Murpheys often. On a side note, I also don't feel that he needs to post a sign about mandatory tipping, he's made it abundantly clear his position to the only person who the sign would even be talking to. Sorry Mike, you're on the extreme fringe here.

[Mike Barskey]

Tipping is a very rewarding (for both parties!) convention....

I have found it not rewarding. If you are using that as reason to tip, does that excuse me from tipping?

Absolutely! The only valid reason to tip is because you see it as rewarding. "Reward" as I mean it though takes on the following forms, listed in order of importance:

• The relationship of good-will built between consumer (literally ) and server
• The amount of control it gives me in the transaction (as opposed to a flat rate regardless of service quality)
• The knowledge that you won't be ostracized for not tipping. (This might better be defined as a deterrent rather than a reward, it all depends on how you look at it)

The same consequence of ostracism goes for Keith too. He can ban you (I know he's clarified that he hasn't), but he does so at his own peril of ostracism. I can't say I feel too badly about the situation though and I will continue to go to Murpheys often. On a side note, I also don't feel that he needs to post a sign about mandatory tipping, he's made it abundantly clear his position to the only person who the sign would even be talking to. Sorry Mike, you're on the extreme fringe here.

I realize and have admitted I'm on the fringe; the percentage of people in a tipping culture that don't tip is tiny. But being on the fringe is not a valid logical argument; it's essentially an "ad populum."

Also, I don't understand your statement that Keith shouldn't post a sign saying tipping is required. The arguments on that so far have been that tipping is voluntary, yet Keith doesn't want you as a customer if you don't tip, i.e., tipping is required at Murphy's, yet customers don't know Keith's twist on the tradition until after they have failed to uphold it. Keith doesn't "have to" put up a sign, but wouldn't it be better service to customers to know his version of the custom? A lot of people who do tip, don't tip at all for bad service (as opposed to tipping less for bad service); if someone like that frequented Murphy's, they wouldn't know he had a problem with them not tipping until it was too late and he wouldn't want them as a customer.

Regarding your definition of "rewarding," I was confused by your points, but I don't think it's your wording, I think I am just rushed right now. So I'll get back to that another time.

[mackler]

It's not the law itself that makes [the meal tax] required of me to pay it, its the fact that its written in the menu.

[Tipping] is not based on written, formal, contracts, it is more of a "gentleman's agreement"....I believe that society can, and does, operate very well on preconceptions and traditions.

Not to diverge on too much of a tangent here, but I would point out that traditions, including tipping, may in fact be legally enforceable, even when not expressed in a written law or contract.

"The common law...has often been understood as a result of social custom rather than an imposition of judicial will.  According to this view, the common law implements the customs of the people; it does not impose the judgment of any sovereign body."

--Professor Cass Sunstein, On Analogical Reasoning, Harvard Law Review vol 106, page 754 (1993)

The US Supreme Court has said this of constitutional and fundamental rights:

Constitutional rights are those which are "so rooted in the tradition and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental."

--Justice Benjamin Cardozo in the case of Palko v. Connecticut (1937)

Fundamental rights are those which are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition."

--Justice Lewis Powell in the case of Moore v. City of East Cleveland (1977)

The Supreme Court has also used tradition to deny rights:

The question before the Court is whether the 'liberty' specially protected by the Clause includes a right to commit suicide which itself includes a right to assistance in doing so.  This asserted right has no place in our Nation's traditions...

--Chief Justice William Rehnquist in the case of Washington v. Glucksberg (1997)

And common law is not the only law where tradition is recognized.  Even the vaunted Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) incorporates tradition.

When Professor Llewellyn directed the drafting of the Uniform Commercial Code, he identified the best commercial practices of the day and wrote them into the Code.

--Professor Robert Cooter, Normative Failure Theory of Law, Cornell Law Review, vol. 82 page 948

Every single sale of food and drink at Murphy's is governed by the UCC through RSA 382-A:2-102.  The RSAs specifically say that the UCC "shall be applied...to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage and agreement of the parties."  RSA 382-A:1-103(a)(2). 

In particular, the UCC defines a significant term of legalese: the "usage of trade."  A usage of trade is "any practice or method of dealing having such regularity of observance in a place...or trade as to justify an expectation that it will be observed with respect to the transaction in question."  RSA 382-A:1-303(c).  The UCC then goes on to say that "usage of trade...may supplement or qualify the terms of the agreement."  RSA 382-A:1-303(d)

So before you assume that a tip is not required by law, you may want to ask yourself whether tipping is so regularly observed in restaurants and the restaurant trade as to justify an expectation that it will be observed in your particular transaction.  Because if it is, then the tipping requirement may supplement or qualify the terms of your agreement, i.e. the prices written on your menu (at least according to the judge in a New Hampshire state court).

[Brandon]

Are there any known cases where tipping has been enforced by law?

[Russell Kanning]

Also as noted, will there be a special menu for those who state that their policy is to always tip 10% or 5%?

you will have to ask Reardon on the NHTeaParty site

[Russell Kanning]

A lot of people who do tip, don't tip at all for bad service (as opposed to tipping less for bad service); if someone like that frequented Murphy's, they wouldn't know he had a problem with them not tipping until it was too late and he wouldn't want them as a customer.

I am in that category. I have had bad service and didn't leave any tip at all.
When I have to go to a counter to get some food at a bar, I also do not feel the need to tip 20% to a nonexistent waitress.

[Caleb]

This has been a strange thread.

You order a meal. There is no doubt in your mind that there is an expectation that the customer and not the business establishment will compensate the server for his service. (Granted, that expectation is based on custom, not law.)  And so a bunch of people are griping and refusing to go along with the custom because it isn't specifically contractually written on the menu?  Or else you disagree with the concept in general, so you take it out on a person, a person who likely works very hard?

There's no sign on the menu asking you not to fart during the meal, but that is generally considered uncouth too.  There are lots of customs I don't like (For one, I don't like that elderly people get discounts everywhere you go just because they're old...) but to take your gripe with society out on the server seems in really poor form to me.  I, for one, always have second thoughts about eating with cheapskates who won't tip fairly. It's very uncomfortable for me to be sitting there when the server comes by to see that he's been shafted. At times, it creates pressure for your non-asshole friends to slip the waitress or waiter a little extra money to make up for your blatant disregard at fairly compensating them for their service.

Aren't there better places for anti-establishment energy to be vented than taking it out on those who make $3 an hour?

I'm sorry, but this "I don't legally have to so I'm not going to even if it makes me look like an asshole" attitude seems a little toddleresque to me.

[Jim Johnson]

Mike you cheap bastard, please just shut up and pay. 

Pat K

[Lloyd Danforth]

This has been a strange thread.

You order a meal. There is no doubt in your mind that there is an expectation that the customer and not the business establishment will compensate the server for his service. (Granted, that expectation is based on custom, not law.)  And so a bunch of people are griping and refusing to go along with the custom because it isn't specifically contractually written on the menu?  Or else you disagree with the concept in general, so you take it out on a person, a person who likely works very hard?

There's no sign on the menu asking you not to fart during the meal, but that is generally considered uncouth too.  There are lots of customs I don't like (For one, I don't like that elderly people get discounts everywhere you go just because they're old...) but to take your gripe with society out on the server seems in really poor form to me.  I, for one, always have second thoughts about eating with cheapskates who won't tip fairly. It's very uncomfortable for me to be sitting there when the server comes by to see that he's been shafted. At times, it creates pressure for your non-asshole friends to slip the waitress or waiter a little extra money to make up for your blatant disregard at fairly compensating them for their service.

Aren't there better places for anti-establishment energy to be vented than taking it out on those who make $3 an hour?

I'm sorry, but this "I don't legally have to so I'm not going to even if it makes me look like an asshole" attitude seems a little toddleresque to me.

Why is it up yo the customer to 'fairly compensate' them for their service?  I think Mike has done all of us a service.  I think a study should be made.  Why do restaurants get away with paying their help so little? 
What other industry does business like that?

[Caleb]

In that industry, that is the custom. You don't have to like the custom. You don't have to agree with the custom. You don't have to think the custom is fair, equitable, nice, happy, frolicking, or any other pleasant adjective.

You do need to understand that because of the custom, when you choose to make your little political statement, someone else is not being paid for a service that they legitimately rendered (unless, of course, someone else like the owner or your friend happens to notice you shafting them and compensates for it.)

I, for one, wish that tipping was more of a custom across the board in the service industries. It only makes sense to base the money tied to the service to the quality of the service. It's very libertarian - the direct payer for the service is the recipient of the service, with no middleman. You can think of the food service industry as one of the leaders in a movement for wages being based on quality. In my job, quality of service doesn't really matter, it's how long I've been with the company or not. I would gladly move to a system where tipping was customary for my profession.