The Instigator
dylancatlow
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
millind213
Con (against)
Losing
11 Points

Tipping waiters for their services is an inferior and inefficient system

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
dylancatlow
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/25/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,580 times Debate No: 25272
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (65)
Votes (5)

 

dylancatlow

Pro

I thank my opponent for debating with me and wish him luck!

Definitons:
1) Tipping: Give (someone) a sum of money as a way of rewarding them for their services.
2) Food-servers: One who servers food at a restaurant ( waiter or waitress)
3) Inefficient: Not achieving maximum productivity; wasting or failing to make the best use of time or resources.
4) Inferior: Lower in rank, status, or quality.

I will debating that tipping waiters for their services is an inferior and inefficient way of doing business and should not be practiced anymore while my opponent must support the claim that tipping waiters is an adequate system.


Standard format:

1st - introductions

2nd - Pro=opening arguments / Con= opening arguments and rebuttal

3rd - Pro=rebuttal/closing arguments / Con = closing arguments ONLY


Good luck to my opponent!
Do you accept my terms?

millind213

Con

Tipping, its defenders say, improves service by rewarding good waiters and punishing bad ones

Typically, waiters receive an hourly wage — as little as $2.13 in some states, though California law mandates at least $8

http://www.payscale.com...
http://www.bls.gov...
these are sites showing the income of waiters. tipping is almost half of what they earn in a whole year.

my opponent gave the definitions
Tipping: Give (someone) a sum of money as a way of rewarding them for their services.
Inferior: Lower in rank, status, or quality.
saying that tipping is an inferior system.
the goverment awards soldiers,athletes and recongnised people with medals AND MONEY. Does he mean that even this is an inferior and inefficiet system?
Debate Round No. 1
dylancatlow

Pro


Tipping waiters has become almost ritualistic in today’s society. So ritualistic that waiters and waitresses receive more of their income from the customer than they do from the establishment. I support the notion that this is an inferior system to incorporating the tip amount into the food price and paying the waiters a base rate, giving bonuses to waiters who are seen to repeatedly do their job with excellence. The current system is unfair to the waiter, the customer, and everyone else involved in the restaurant business.
Tips are meant to reward good waiters and punish bad ones by allowing the customer to decide for themselves. Good waiters will get tips for doing a good job and bad ones will receive few tips. This is idealistic when considering the job of the waiter. A great waiter is one who does their job; a bad one is one who doesn’t. There is not an infinite scale of the job of a waiter when considering quality. Many times, the quality of service has no correlation with the tip amount at all. People have a preset amount of money they will give to the waiter, withholding the payment only in cases of extreme incompetence. This system is inefficient and is simply the monetization of social pressure.
The non-standardization of tipping leaves much room for inefficiency. Waiters are chasing tips, and that doesn’t necessarily mean they are chasing good service. Waiters have developed a keen eye for knowing which customers will tip well, and which won’t. With the current system, who can blame them? Their lively hood is based off of arbitrary tips for arbitrary reasons. This system leaves motivation to ignore customers which are believed not to tip and fight over the customers they believe will. Waiters know that what they do will have little effect on their tip. All they can do is do their job and hope for the best; and choose the right customers. This puts unnecessary stress on waiters who would be better off receiving a base rate for doing their job.
Tipping is also unfair to the customer. Tipping benefits people who do not care and punishes people who are altruistic. The people who tip the waiters support those who don’t. Customers are trapped in a situation where they feel they must tip, regardless if they feel the waiter deserves it. Everyone knows that waiters receive a very low base rate for their work and therefore tipping waiters is the only way they will be able to support themselves. While I agree this is true, I do not agree is it unpreventable. Waiters receive a low base rate only because they will be tipped. The management knows this ahead of time and pays accordingly. Customers who are unable to afford a tip feel embarrassed and the waiter is angered. This is easily avoidable with a higher base rate provided by higher meal prices. This forces customers to support the waiters regardless if they want to or can afford it. A base rate pay would create even more pressure for the waiter to do a good job because instead of receiving a low tip for very poor service, their manager will hear about it. The tipping platform for customers venting frustration has very few sanctions for the waiter. They will receive a small tip, if any. This does not mean they lost out. They may sacrifice low paying customers’ service for high paying customers’ service and reap the reward.
The tipping platform leaves much room for discrimination against waiters based on their race, gender, sexual orientation, or other fader for discrimination. Customers may leave low tips for groups of people they dislike; consciously or not. This is extremely unfair to the waiter as they depend on tips for much of their income. It is very unlikely that with a base rate pay for waiters, customers would use the new medium of expressing the quality of their service and tell the management that they were unhappy with their service because their waiter was black; even if they were extremely discriminatory. With the current tipping system, a customer could provide a smaller tip based on the race of the waiter and no one would notice.


Sources:
1) http://www.salon.com...
2) http://www.wisegeek.com...

millind213

Con

November 2006, Jay Porter, the owner of a small restaurant in San Diego called the Linkery, scheduled a staff meeting. Less than two years old, the casual farm-to-table restaurant in the rapidly gentrifying neighborhood of North Park had already won praise from national magazines. Nonetheless, Porter was troubled. The staff was squabbling, mainly over money: waiters were angling for better shifts and tables, and the kitchen workers didn't feel they were getting a fair share of the profits.
Porter considered raising the prices of each item on the menu and simply increasing the wages of his employees. But that would have penalized the restaurant's many takeout diners. Also, he figured many potential diners would look at the prices and — not factoring in what they spend on tips — compare them unfavorably with those of his competitors.

If he could, he would have raised everyone's wages, but there wasn't enough revenue. The restaurant was already paying 65 percent of its employees' health-insurance premiums, and Porter was working on a scheme to give long-term employees ownership stakes in the business. Still, he worried that his staff might not be receptive to his proposal

Eighty percent of Americans say they prefer tipping to paying a service fee, according to Zagat Survey. They do so, Leo Crespi's surveys first demonstrated, primarily because they believe tipping provides an incentive for good service. But there is little correlation, in fact— less than 2 percent, according to Michael Lynn, a Cornell professor of consumer behavior and marketing.

Some experts speculate that tipping is also a form of social equalization, a means to share the wealth with a hardworking but underpaid service worker. The practice of tipping used to be connected to the perceived quality of services provided
http://www.nytimes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
dylancatlow

Pro


Your response is quite disappointing. You copied the entire thing off a New York Times article and it has added little to the discussion. You have not rebuked any one of my many arguments. You even said in your own response that there is little correlation -- 2 percent -- with tips and good service. Your own response has only strengthened my arguments -- waiters fighting over hours, kitchen staff not feeling like they get equal share.


millind213

Con

you had written about increasing the prices on meals.so, my answer is why it cant be done.The case of Porter was taken as an example to prove my points.
For the point of "The staff was squabbling, mainly over money: waiters were angling for better shifts and tables, and the kitchen workers didn't feel they were getting a fair share of the profits.".i believe increases compition and the problem of solving this is not anti tipping.
Debate Round No. 3
65 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
unfortunately , DDO does not contain an avatar fitting that description. Unless you have a picture handy and a fax machine.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
Well, you're more of a village idiot than a jester.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
So you have been laughing this whole time? My job as a jester is done.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
That made no sense whatsoever. You haven't made any arguments that aren't laughably poor.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
I understand the elephant problem, actually. It just doesn't have to do with the debate at hand. You said "If you made a single argument that weren't laughably poor, I would pounce on it, not drop it. "
But you haven't pounced on my non-laughably poor argument. You haven't even addressed it. You have dropped it. Since you have not dropped any of my past arguments, I can conclude that this one is beyond your reason.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
It's abundantly clear that all of our many disagreements stem from your inability to understand basic English and logic. lolumad.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
As I thought. You don't understand the problem with the 'all animals are elephants' argument. Even a not-so-bright toddler can see why it's wrong. I said that I would pounce on a decent argument, not that I wouldn't pounce on and ridicule an idiotic one. Understand now?

lolumad.

Vote con, everyone; Dylan is epically retarded.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
You are wrong. You said " If you made a single argument that weren't laughably poor, I would pounce on it, not drop it. "
Since you have been "pouncing" this whole time, I can deductively conclude that I haven't been making laughably poor arguments.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
That makes no sense. All of your arguments have been abysmal, but if you were to make a decent one, I would pounce on it, not ignore it. Hence, my statement made perfect sense and was correct. Your proof that you're an elephant, however, does not make sense. And you've failed to understand causality yet again; you won't find any logical fallacies in my comments, because there aren't any, not vice versa.

lolumad.

Vote con.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
Yes, I agree that is what I said. I was showing how fallacious your reasoning was by saying "By this logic,"
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by igaryoak 4 years ago
igaryoak
dylancatlowmillind213Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro laid out legitimate points, whereas Con pasted an article refuting very few of Pro's points.
Vote Placed by joshizinfamous 4 years ago
joshizinfamous
dylancatlowmillind213Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided a very clear argument which pro refused. He copied alot which you could of used in answering his arguments, but you just stipulated that since he didn't I dont have to, which is incorrect. If you would of answered them obvious pro vote is obvious.
Vote Placed by adontimasu 4 years ago
adontimasu
dylancatlowmillind213Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and spelling
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
dylancatlowmillind213Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did copy his arguments from a source but he still was able to defeat the Pro's arguments which were centered around the idea that since there isnt a standardized scale for tipping, that suddenly makes it inefficient, which I didnt buy
Vote Placed by Clash 4 years ago
Clash
dylancatlowmillind213Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro clearly proved that tipping waiters for their services is an inferior and inefficient system. Con didn't respond to none of Pro's arguments and copied his whole case from a New York Times article.