rich

Not if the gratuity is included.

And add to that, when the EC is also a CC it multiplies exponentially based on stardom because of other commitments. That's the bad part about becoming a top chef - you never get to cook. But Wylie's still hanging tough.

Hey Rax, I made the Chicken Liver Mousse for Easter Sunday and I got the taste just about perfect. It was a little heavier, so I'll work on "more fluffy" the next time. Thanks.

Not in entire disagreement with that, but I think WD-50's kitchen needs him more than the others I mentioned above. Maybe I'll try to eat there on a Sunday.

I never read the study, so I can't help on how he arrived at his conclusions. From what I remember of the discussion, a lot of focus was paid to interviewing customers upon leaving a restaurant. I didn't believe those would accurate considering people often say things they think the interviewer wants to hear - see political exit polling. The discussion then got into tip pooling, which was what Per Se is doing. That's where the heated discussion started - based on the same pay for all and the better waiters getting the same share as the mediocre ones. As far as the above, it could be considered any of the choices you listed. But if they were pooling their tips, it wouldn't matter and the staff wouldn't care who got the table.

Yes, you're correct. I believe the discussion then evolved into tipping in general and that's how the debate about quality of service vs. gratuity started.

I think this thread immediately went beyond the scope of the particular article, but looked at the tipping/bribing issue in general. As with most subjects, there are areas of gray that lead to meaningful debates and discussion. However, if the focus is simply on the hostess who took money to seat one party ahead of others who had reservations, then I would totally agree that's wrong. I wouldn't go as far as saying it's immoral, but it certainly flys in the face of fairness and respect.

Not quite true for everyday. Alas, he was not in the night I ate.... ← Normally, I would say it doesn't matter who's in the kitchen. But I think WD-50 is the exception that proves the rule. Wylie's food is so unique, I think it demands him being there for the full experience. I could understand how his absence would affect the food more than a Batali, Ducasse or Keller for example.

Ingrid, from reading the above, you agree with Anne and me. You have a slightly different take (20% guarantee), but you do add money for top service. Yet, the study (as you read in the tipping thread) stated that's not the case.

SE, when were you there? Was it crowded or difficult to get a reservation? Were any of the big guns in the house? Thanks for the report.

Anne, I agree with you, but was in a very small minority. Perhaps a moderator or someone who is better with the threads than me can provide a link (I forget the actual title), but it took place in the last half of 2005. I do remember everyone was quoting this guy from Texas, who did the research for a local university. I don't remember his name.

It seems the majority of posts refer to "cutting a line" of waiting people and I understand that's done, but I think not as frequently as some of the posts suggest. (And just for the record, I have never tipped a host/hostess to cut a line. The closest is when I have tipped because I didn't make a reservation at a very busy restaurant and it's my way of saying "...if you can seat me when you have an opening, I would appreciate it. I was dumb for not making a reservation." Will that get me a table before another person who didn't have a reservation and didn't tip? Probably, but I have no problem with that since we both failed to call ahead. I chose to take a step to correct the error, the other person didn't.) I listed several other reasons (upthread) why tips are given to restaurant staff before the meal. Does anyone have a problem with any of them? Also, what are people's opinions about places where an automatic gratuity is added to the bill? Since this is "paid" in a sense before the meal (actual dollar amount determined from bill), does anyone have a problem with it? I know it's collected after the meal, but that's irrelevent because you know about it before you order or possibly prior to visiting the resto. The reason I ask is several posts referred to the "tip" being given after the meal as a reward for good service and a "bribe" be given before the service occurs. Using Per Se as an example, since they add 22 percent to the bill, you don't have that option with an automatic charge. Sure you can add to the tip and slip someone some money, but the choice of giving less is not an option. The same holds true for many restaurants that add the gratuity (usually 18 percent) with parties of six or more. Finally, there was a tipping topic several months ago where the large majority of posters said (and they quoted research papers) that service has no bearing on the tip amount. From my years as a waiter in a relatively upscale place, I disagreed based on my tips versus other staff members. However, I was told my experience was anecdotal and was disproved by this quoted research. But a number or posters on this thread indicate they do tip on service by either giving more or less depending on the experience. There seems to be a conflict somewhere.

We get into a danger zone for eG Forums when we start to have political arguments about the corruption in the political system. Suffice it to say that many people are very angry about just the kind of corruption and legalized bribery you are passing off as normal and acceptable. ← One thing I hate and find immoral is being misquoted when the statement is right there in public. I never said I find the system of political contributions acceptable. Normal, unfortunately yes. (In fact, I refuse to check off that $1 box on my income tax because I dislike the "contribution" sytem so much.) If you bothered to post the rest of my statement (from the prior post, which was linked with "Let's give one more example..."), I was saying tipping a host or hostess for a special service or request is better than giving money to politicians, which I do consider a bribe because their asking for your vote and money based on campaign promises. Hence the use of "you decide" at the end and the word contribute in quotes in the beginning - an obvious way of making that point. If you're going to use my quote to make a comment, please don't take statements out of context to make a point - as a former journalist I believe that's about as immoral as one can get. And this from an eGullet official. This has been an interesting and thought provoking thread - one of the best in recent memory and no one (up to this point) has made attacks or used statements in a derisive manner. We have all been a funny, sarcastic and serious, let's try to keep it that way.

Isn't the term "pre-dated" redundant? How can you date something before you date something? It's similar to the term "pre-recorded" you hear on television. Something can't be recorded before it's recorded. Now you can say "tip" dated the acronym by hundreds of years - that would be fine. Still no one has come up with the derivation of bribe - I am very disappointed.

Let's give one more example. A majority of people "contribute" to a political candidate based on the campaign promises of a candidate. This is done before the individual is elected. (Some even give to both party's candidates to play it safe - and maybe get that traffic light installed on your corner). Do you think the candidates are "bribing" us with their promises in order to get the contribution? What happens after the person is elected? You decide. Now that you decided, who do you trust more - the politician or the hostess/host of a restaurant? And where/who would you rather give your tip/bribe? It's that silly glass house thing that keeps getting in the way of morals. I just hate that stuff.

It seems the above posts by people who don't want to give money to restuarant staff people, but can see other areas of doing this, refers to the "situational morality" that I mentioned about 175 posts ago. Let's put this whole thing into perspective - we all do it at some time or another to some person at some level of business, industry, religion, education, etc. Some may feel a need to call it somehing other than a tip/bribe in those situations for ethical or moral reasons or simply to feel better about themselves. So it's referred to as a donation, gift, endowment, stipend, bonus etc. But if we take the time to dismount the high horse and breath regular air, then we realize it's all the same thing. Heck, churches and synagogues charge for prime seating these days. I mean, the main reason religions ask its congregation for money is to guarantee us a better place in the hereafter - if that's not the ultimate tip/bribe, I don't what is. And most of us pay/give just to play it safe. PS - I see no one has come up with the derivation of the word "bribe" yet. I'm very disappointed. Only one of the definitions mention an "unknown Romantic origin." After five years studying Latin, I can say with total confidence it's not unknown. And I think most would be quite surprised what in meant some 2000-3000 years ago. Keep searching - it will prove be a fruitful Easter Hunt (hint).

Actually the "old Romantic word" is not of uncertain origin at all. It may be quite surprising to learn where it originated. I'm sure someone will find it soon - possibly on the sports book site. Daniel - we're not allowed to call it tip before the service, so those doctors in China are getting a bribe. I hope they don't know the origin of the term.

What about FedEx? Does the Sports Betting Book have a problem with that term? While we're at it, somone should reseach the word bribe - hint: comes from Latin. Either way, I'm sure everyone's karma is safe for today - it's Good Friday.

Isn't the term pre-tipping redundant? If tip means to insure promptness, then what does pre-tip mean? - to send the tip ahead via FedEx?

You're going to the wrong places and parking on some pretty mean streets my friend. You need to upgrade in a hurry.

I can't speak for everyone who tips, but I don't think that's the reason it's done the majority of time. Sure, there are the boorish who do this just because they can (I believe they're a miniscule minority), but most of the time there's a specific reason. I could list a few of the reasons I do it, but I can't say who it applies to or who it doesn't. Special occasion "to insure promptness" (tip) and maybe just a touch of special treatment that might become necessary during the course of the evening. If I don't have a reservation at a resto that's particularly busy that evening - could get me a table before others who have no reservation. Or possibly be seated immediately when they have a cancellation or no-show. That's a supply/demand situation and says I was stupid for not making a reservation, so I hope this (a tip), in some way, makes up for my glaring mistake. An appointment that can't be missed, ie theater, travel arrangements etc - asked to be seated ASAP. Business or social dinner that will take a long time and/or the need of some privacy - possibly a requested special table that affords that luxury and patience. To show that your interested in the place, its food and the staff that will be serving you - sometimes it leads to an extra tasting plate or after dinner drink etc. It shows you understand these people make their living from "tips." I probably could go on for awhile, but I hope you get the concept from the above five examples. I don't think anyone does it all the time, just those occasions that warrant it. Sometimes it just might get you that extra pickle with your pastrami sandwich. (As an aside I've also seen some people work their magic without a money transaction. I've known people to appeal to the heart. In other words, they lie to the host/hostess about a special anniversary, birthday, the "in town for one night line," even a "recovery from sickness and first night out." I think that type of behavior certainly should be considered immoral, but not tipping.) I'm sure tipping doesn't work for everyone, but if done discreetly and respectfully then everyone's happy. There are no losers.

Actually, and I'm being very serious here, a lot BOH people will say a kitchen runs smoother and more efficiently when the EC or CC isn't around. New Yorker magazine did a piece on that issue about four-five years ago and focused on Batali, Ducasse, Flay, Lagasse and Ripert among others. It was an interesting article - wish I could find it.

Seriously, I'm not sure what you mean by the first sentence. Actually was a dishwasher in high school. Saw many chefs and other help have a drink or two while they were working. Why would that be a problem (unless they got drunk - but I never witnessed that)? ← First: You'd said that during-shift drinks would be appreciated by those who don't consume alcohol. I say, they can appreciate it just as much after service. Second: I wonder why any bartender/FOH staff would stop what they're doing and run around getting drinks for themselves and the BOH staff, during service. I wonder what any good chef or owner would do, if his line cooks stopped working and enjoyed a beer. ← First - I don't think I said that at all. I never brought up the subject of drinks. I said what purpose does your round of drinks serve to those who don't consume alcohol? After all, soft drinks are free to employees (in most places). I don't see it as time consuming for someone to run a beer or two into the kitchen, or even a scotch and soda. I don't think you see many BOH people drinking Brandy Alexander's. And I think most anyone can sip a drink and continue to work - it may take two or three seconds to do that. You frequently see staff take water, it takes no more time to drink water then it does a beer.

There are three other things they do and I would be remiss in not including them, I apologize to those affected CE chefs for leaving these out in my first post. They also must set aside several hours a day for autograph signings and "hangin" with groupies, do TV and radio commercials endorsing everything from ED remedies to sanitary pads to toothpaste and fly around the world to open other restaurants some of which have $12 million Italian marble floors directly imported from the hills overlooking Bayonne, New Jersey.

But celebrity chefs aren't supposed to cook, they're supposed to delegate. The CE's job is to make TV appearances, write cookbooks and/or tell-all books, endorse a new line of cookware, do voice checks for their syndicated radio show, travel around the world to write columns for food mags, do test screening (which includes makeup and wardrobe) for their TV show, do fittings for their new clothes line, supervise the manufacture of their own bobble head dolls, make appearances at opening nights for theater, movies, award ceremonies (possibly throw a party at those) and sporting events and curse out people on ebay posts. With all that on their plate, there's no time to cook. And why would you want them to cook? Most haven't done so in years except on TV and at media events. I know a CE who walked into a professional kitchen and became severly disoriented. It took about ten minutes to revive him - he had no idea where he was.