Friday, September 10, 2004

Musings on the "service" industry

There was an article today in our local paper about a guy who got arrested in a nearby tourist town. He claims it was because he refused to leave a mandatory tip at a restaurant. The owner claims it wasn't really about a few dollars but primarily because the man's group was being "rude and abrasive." Though the actual charge was theft of services. The man said they also were not told of the mandatory gratuity, and did not see notice of it on their menus.

I will start by saying one of my major pet peeves is people who are gratuitously rude to service employees. Some people think because they pay a few bucks to go to an amusement park or eating establishment, it gives them the right to be obnoxious and abusive to anyone who stands in their way. If there's a pickle on your hamburger when you specifically asked for no pickles, then tell someone. You can look annoyed while you're waiting for a new one. You can fill out one of the comment cards. You can even explain to the manager why you're agitated. But there's no need to be a jerk about it and start ranting and raving at everyone like a lunatic. Unless, of course, you've never ever made a mistake in your job. The people you're screaming at probably don't get paid enough to deserve to deal with idiots like that.

(A related memo to service workers: if you're having a bad day and can't be cheery, then at least don't be outright unpleasant. I didn't cause your misery. And everyone in 20 foot vicinity of you doesn't need to hear about how your boyfriend cheated on you)

That said, I object to the whole concept of a mandatory gratuity. It's an oxymoron like preventive war or obligatory volunteerism that some schools require of students. The whole point of a tip is to reward the server(s) based on how good the food, service and atmosphere were. It's supposed to be a merit-based compensation, a bonus. Mandatory tips are not merit-based.

But what bothers me most is the whole idea of someone else telling me how much a server deserves to be rewarded yet making it seem like it's somehow my choice. It's deceptive.

The price of a restaurant item should reflect four things: the cost of the food, the proportional cost of all labor required to run a restaurant, other expenses associated with operating a restaurant (electricity, rent/mortgage, etc) and profit for the owner. When I purchase a burger and fries, I assume that the cost reflects those four considerations.

If an owner thinks his workers are so poorly compensated, I'd much rather they increase the regular prices rather than being presumputous enough to impose a mandatory tip. It's far less disingenuous.

Everything on a bill is for something. $6.95 for a quesadilla. $4.50 for a beer. $3 for a piece of pie. But what's the gratuity for? I'm being forced to pay 15-20% for the honor of sitting in their chairs and giving them my hard earned money?

I won't eat at restaurants that charge a mandatory "gratuity." I'd rather eat at a place with higher menu prices, because at least they're not being so deceptive.

*

Speaking of deception, how about Ticketmaster? I think nearly everyone who likes music has issues (to put it mildly) with Ticketmaster. It's bad enough that their virtual monopoly on ticketing allows them to charge obscene prices. But they gouge you further with some invention called a "convenience charge."

The "convenience charge" is typically anywhere from $8-10 per ticket. Sometimes that's 20% or more of the total cost of the ticket. In other words, you're paying Ticketmaster a 20% fee on top of the face value of the ticket for the convenience of giving them your money.

This is another example of deceptive practices. The face value of the ticket should include everything. It should include remuneration for the band and its entourage. It should include remuneration for the venue hosting the band. It should include both remenueration for Ticketmaster employees and profit for Ticketmaster. The face value of the ticket should be the total cost of all the services you are taking advantage of.

The only extra fee I ought to pay is if I want the tickets mailed to me instead of picking them up at will call, because that's an extra service I'm requiring.

This is why I pretty much don't go to concerts. When a "$35" ticket really costs $45, I'm really not interested in shelling out more than half a days net wages for a two hour (maybe) concert where I'm standing or sitting on the grass the whole time. And they wonder why concert ticket sales are down.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

In regards to "convenience" fees... there is no convenience fee on an event ticket if the ticket is purchased at the box office of the venue where the show is taking place. Ticketmaster charges you for the "convenience" of not having to go to the venue's box office. Instead you can "conveniently" go to your local Ticketmaster, or even better, sit online at home.

That being said, I hate Ticketmaster.

Brian said...

Anon: As a test, I went through the process to order a ticket online to a Green Day concert in Hartford, CT.

The face value of the ticket was $43.

The convenience charge was $8.6 (20%!).

Then, there was also something called a building facility charge of $2. That's the sort of garbage I'm talking about. I'm assuming that building facility charge applies to everyone, regardless of how they order. Why is that just not integrated to the face value of the ticket price.

It's worth adding to anon's comment that the Ticketmaster convenience charge does NOT include the fee they charge to mail tickets to your home, if you desire. That fee is either $18.50 or $19.50.