Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

You know, we have plent y of SCIENCE that says rewarding someone does not ensure better outcomes. In fact, it makes it worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candle_problem

Subjects who were offered no prize, termed low-drive, were told "We are doing pilot work on various problems in order to decide which will be the best ones to use in an experiment we plan to do later. We would like to obtain norms on the time needed to solve." The remaining subjects, termed high-drive, were told "Depending on how quickly you solve the problem you can win $5.00 or $20.00. The top 25% of the Ss [subjects] in your group will win $5.00 each; the best will receive $20.00. Time to solve will be the criterion used." (As a note, adjusting for inflation since 1962, the study's publish year, the amounts in today's dollars would be approximately $39 and $156, respectively.[7]) The empty-boxes condition was found to be easier than the filled-boxes condition: more subjects solved the problem, and those who did solve the problem solved it faster. Within the filled-boxes condition, high-drive subjects performed worse than low-drive subjects.

Therefore, screw tipping and just pay people and actual wage. Thanks.

Paying people more money means that prices will increase slightly and I have to pay a little bit more for goods and services?

How did this happen? Why didn't anyone tell me? Socialism, why have you failed me?

I'm guessing if I add a "$0.35 military charge" to account for the extra taxes I have to pay for the wars I would be considered extra clever as well.

 d-usa wrote:

I'm guessing if I add a "$0.35 military charge" to account for the extra taxes I have to pay for the wars I would be considered HATING AMERICA :(.

Fixed that for you.

 d-usa wrote:
Paying people more money means that prices will increase slightly and I have to pay a little bit more for goods and services?

How did this happen? Why didn't anyone tell me? Socialism, why have you failed me?

I'm guessing if I add a "$0.35 military charge" to account for the extra taxes I have to pay for the wars I would be considered extra clever as well.

You pay slightly more, but don't have to tip unless you want to, so may actually end up paying less while the server actually takes home about the same due to increased wage and (potentially) decreased tip.

 Easy E wrote:
You know, we have plent y of SCIENCE that says rewarding someone does not ensure better outcomes. In fact, it makes it worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candle_problem

Subjects who were offered no prize, termed low-drive, were told "We are doing pilot work on various problems in order to decide which will be the best ones to use in an experiment we plan to do later. We would like to obtain norms on the time needed to solve." The remaining subjects, termed high-drive, were told "Depending on how quickly you solve the problem you can win $5.00 or $20.00. The top 25% of the Ss [subjects] in your group will win $5.00 each; the best will receive $20.00. Time to solve will be the criterion used." (As a note, adjusting for inflation since 1962, the study's publish year, the amounts in today's dollars would be approximately $39 and $156, respectively.[7]) The empty-boxes condition was found to be easier than the filled-boxes condition: more subjects solved the problem, and those who did solve the problem solved it faster. Within the filled-boxes condition, high-drive subjects performed worse than low-drive subjects.

Therefore, screw tipping and just pay people and actual wage. Thanks.

Entire industries based on getting the deal done being commission based tell us otherwise.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
You know, we have plent y of SCIENCE that says rewarding someone does not ensure better outcomes. In fact, it makes it worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candle_problem

Subjects who were offered no prize, termed low-drive, were told "We are doing pilot work on various problems in order to decide which will be the best ones to use in an experiment we plan to do later. We would like to obtain norms on the time needed to solve." The remaining subjects, termed high-drive, were told "Depending on how quickly you solve the problem you can win $5.00 or $20.00. The top 25% of the Ss [subjects] in your group will win $5.00 each; the best will receive $20.00. Time to solve will be the criterion used." (As a note, adjusting for inflation since 1962, the study's publish year, the amounts in today's dollars would be approximately $39 and $156, respectively.[7]) The empty-boxes condition was found to be easier than the filled-boxes condition: more subjects solved the problem, and those who did solve the problem solved it faster. Within the filled-boxes condition, high-drive subjects performed worse than low-drive subjects.

Therefore, screw tipping and just pay people and actual wage. Thanks.

Entire industries based on getting the deal done being commission based tell us otherwise.

Keep the Peons in their place and promote the worthy ones

I suppose we could put down this matter to the American culture of "if you can't look after yourself then its not the responsibility of others to do that for you". Youknow, the same argument against healthcare "I don't want to pay my taxes to help someone out who should be doing that form themselves". A minimum wage keeps people out of poverty (heh, well its suppose to whether its actually enough is another topic). Not paying someone that because they don't have the personality to net a load of tips, or because people just don't want to give them the cash isn't a good attitude. The tips system is open to so much exploitation, whereas if the employer has to give someone a straight number each week at least they know that person's being paid. Again its a difference of cultures I suppose. Here everyone has a minimum wage and its something that's expected. You can screw up sure, but its not at the discretion of random people off the street and the mood their in whether you're paid, that's up to your employer. I mean what if you do a fine job and aren't paid? Is that fair? Shouldn't it be up to the guy in charge whether they think you're a good enough employee to earn your keep? Yup, dumb system, but I can understand why people are in the mindset to defend it. Not that I agree with that attitude or would want to live under it though.

nkelsch wrote:

 easysauce wrote:


the resteraunt could have just increased prices accordingly and no one would have whined,

Yes they would have. The people who are indignant about this issue are the same people who think every business owner is swimming in cash and would have complained if they were charged extra for cheese, or had no tomatoes due to high prices and just say 'the owner should absorb the costs and make it work!' without actually knowing anything about how that would be done.

I think you are correct in that they would have complained had they noticed, I do however, think that the people complaining are not always smart enough to notice the slight price increase in the first place!

 easysauce wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 easysauce wrote:


the resteraunt could have just increased prices accordingly and no one would have whined,

Yes they would have. The people who are indignant about this issue are the same people who think every business owner is swimming in cash and would have complained if they were charged extra for cheese, or had no tomatoes due to high prices and just say 'the owner should absorb the costs and make it work!' without actually knowing anything about how that would be done.

I think you are correct in that they would have complained had they noticed, I do however, think that the people complaining are not always smart enough to notice the slight price increase in the first place!

Clue: New Menu's

 cincydooley wrote:

Bear in mind that in the US the cost of food is kept lower at many restaurants because of how the pay is structured for the servers. The restaurants aren't "double dipping."
.

I admit it's been a while since I went stateside, but from what I recall food in restaurants wasn't all that cheap (excepting the wee one-man lunch thingies in random Texan villages - great food there, BTW! ), it was about as much cheaper as everything else was compared to the Netherlands, and we don't have a tipping culture at all, so IMO restaurant owners in the US are making lots of money by grossly underpaying their servers, and then laughing at their customers for having to tip the waiters so they can at least make a living... So yeah, I think they are "double dipping"...

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I suppose we could put down this matter to the American culture of "if you can't look after yourself then its not the responsibility of others to do that for you". Youknow, the same argument against healthcare "I don't want to pay my taxes to help someone out who should be doing that form themselves". A minimum wage keeps people out of poverty (heh, well its suppose to whether its actually enough is another topic). Not paying someone that because they don't have the personality to net a load of tips, or because people just don't want to give them the cash isn't a good attitude. The tips system is open to so much exploitation, whereas if the employer has to give someone a straight number each week at least they know that person's being paid. Again its a difference of cultures I suppose. Here everyone has a minimum wage and its something that's expected. You can screw up sure, but its not at the discretion of random people off the street and the mood their in whether you're paid, that's up to your employer. I mean what if you do a fine job and aren't paid? Is that fair? Shouldn't it be up to the guy in charge whether they think you're a good enough employee to earn your keep? Yup, dumb system, but I can understand why people are in the mindset to defend it. Not that I agree with that attitude or would want to live under it though.

Well we are certainly glad you don't have to!

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I suppose we could put down this matter to the American culture of "if you can't look after yourself then its not the responsibility of others to do that for you". Youknow, the same argument against healthcare "I don't want to pay my taxes to help someone out who should be doing that form themselves". A minimum wage keeps people out of poverty (heh, well its suppose to whether its actually enough is another topic). Not paying someone that because they don't have the personality to net a load of tips, or because people just don't want to give them the cash isn't a good attitude. The tips system is open to so much exploitation, whereas if the employer has to give someone a straight number each week at least they know that person's being paid. Again its a difference of cultures I suppose. Here everyone has a minimum wage and its something that's expected. You can screw up sure, but its not at the discretion of random people off the street and the mood their in whether you're paid, that's up to your employer. I mean what if you do a fine job and aren't paid? Is that fair? Shouldn't it be up to the guy in charge whether they think you're a good enough employee to earn your keep? Yup, dumb system, but I can understand why people are in the mindset to defend it. Not that I agree with that attitude or would want to live under it though.

You do know one of the last remaining UK industries (Finance) is commission based right? RIGHT?

How about real estate agents? Salesmen? You don't get bonuses in your country? Oh yea you do.
So your argument is what we call "full of it."

Adding it to the receipts just make the owner or owners look like jackasses, It's poltiical horsegak masquerading as transparency. If other costs went up, does anyone truly think they'd add a "fee" to all receipts?

 Frazzled wrote:

You do know one of the last remaining UK industries (Finance) is commission based right? RIGHT?

How about real estate agents? Salesmen? You don't get bonuses in your country? Oh yea you do.
So your argument is what we call "full of it."

But that's in the SMALL PRINT!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crablezworth wrote:
Adding it to the receipts just make the owner or owners look like jackasses, It's poltiical horsegak masquerading as transparency. If other costs went up, does anyone truly think they'd add a "fee" to all receipts?

This is the most insightful thing I think I've read here yet. I approve.

nkelsch wrote:

The truth is, it stays this way because good waitstaff *CAN* make bank, and bad ones cry about it. I know people who easily make 1000$ a weekend from tips for 2 days of work.

A buddy of mine makes that in about 3 hours But, to be fair, he's a bartender at a place that makes real drinks. The irony (from his point of view) is that his beer crowd generally tip better than his mixed drink crowd.


Also, I'm not sure if most of Europe is the same in regards tipping, but I know in Germany it was largely frowned upon to give the American custom 15%.... Generally, the wife and I would follow the German custom of "tipping" the metal change and keeping any bills that came in the "change" from our ticket.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:


Entire industries based on getting the deal done being commission based tell us otherwise.

The washout rate within those same industries is quite staggeringly high as well

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:


Entire industries based on getting the deal done being commission based tell us otherwise.

The washout rate within those same industries is quite staggeringly high as well

I worked in sales in my early twenties and the only people who didn't wash out were the sociopaths. I don't think you need to be a sociopath to be a salesman, but it helps, a lot, in the long run.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
The washout rate within those same industries is quite staggeringly high as well

And staff turnover in the food and beverage industry can be huge too

What gets me is how trivial the 35c increase is.

For all the rhetoric about minimum wage you'd think the surcharge would be, you know, this major hike that'd drive customers away. But I simply do not believe that there is a single person out there who could honestly claim they were going to sit down and eat a steak for $8.50, but when they see the price is $8.85 they walk away.

And yet we still get so much noise and outrage. It's something very weird in people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
You do know one of the last remaining UK industries (Finance) is commission based right? RIGHT?

How about real estate agents? Salesmen? You don't get bonuses in your country? Oh yea you do.
So your argument is what we call "full of it."

Uh, commission is a fixed fee based on delivery. Tipping is entirely left up to the discretion of the customer. As no financial commission or brokerage fee has ever let the customer decide what he'd like to pay after the deal was done, your argument is silly.

Can still maintain the original price and just drink water with the meal

 Jihadin wrote:
Can still maintain the original price and just drink water with the meal

Or just drink 35c less worth of beer.

Who is eating an $8.50 steak at a restaurant. Ewwwwww.

I like tipping people for good service, especially people who aren't necessarily expecting a tip.

However, I find the 'tipping culture' that they have in the US very dishonest. People are essentially shamed into tipping, whether they had good service or not, under the premise that servers aren't paid enough. And employers think that it's okay to not pay enough, under the premise that the server can make up the difference in 'hypothetical' tips, which of the course they have no legal recourse to collect.

I think things have gone too far when I read stories about people being chased down the street by disgruntled waiters. I recall an article about a waiter in NY who threw back a 10% tip claiming it wasn't enough. He was used to 20% (presumably 10% as tip, and another 10% for his wages). That's disgusting. If he isn't happy with his pay then he should take it up with his boss, not customers. In the UK that guy would most likely be fired.

I understand that an attractive server might be able to make good money in tips, but I don't see why that means they shouldn't still be guaranteed a livable wage. Especially when that directly effects things like sick pay and holidays.

Source:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22846846

Crablezworth wrote:

I worked in sales in my early twenties and the only people who didn't wash out were the sociopaths. I don't think you need to be a sociopath to be a salesman, but it helps, a lot, in the long run.

Source please. Please to cite the mental health evaluations of your co-workers.....Or better yet, just go ahead and admit that you're talking out you ass.

Seriously, Too much bs and too little history in this thread.


First, the american system has not always allowed for tipped employees to be paid under minimum wage. Once upon a time in the US, waiter staff and bartenders were paid a base that was usually in excess of minimum wage. This is because such jobs were considered time honoured occupations/professions.

When the US government enacted the FLSA in 1938, there was no exception for people in the service industry. Service industry employees had the same protections then and up through 4 decades of revisions/amendments. Until 1977, When (D) Jimmy Carter and a Democrat controlled house and Democrat controlled congress amended the act to allow for tipped employees to be paid less than min wage...(unless their tips failed to make up the difference).

Remember when it happened .... thought it was bs then and still feel the same.

In 1976, A bartender at a decent club in Dallas would pull $8/hr +tips. Wait staff at good restaurant pulled about $4/hr +tips. At that time $4/hr was almost double the minimum $2.30/hr wage.
Good bartenders could pull down $30k +/yr. Best one I know of made over $400/night in tips average.(Yes, in 1976).

Point is that while a good bartender or wait person doesn't need the min wage once they are proficient. A decent wage is a must while they are learning their craft and in order to attract professional people.

Later,
ff

 cincydooley wrote:
Who is eating an $8.50 steak at a restaurant. Ewwwwww.

The same people who would be swayed by having to pay another 35c. Theoretical people who exist only in rightwing pretend outrage.

 Frazzled wrote:
We get along fine with our system thanks. You can keep yours.

Please don't speak for all of us. I think our system sucks.

- - - - -

Never worked in the server industry myself, but as someone who eats out rather frequently it's obvious just how gakky and under-appreciated their jobs often are, so by default I tip 20% on all my meals, with a sliding scale. Every time a server feths up or shows attitude I drop my tip amount down 5%- I've only gotten down to 0 on a handful of occasions.

 focusedfire wrote:

Crablezworth wrote:I worked in sales in my early twenties and the only people who didn't wash out were the sociopaths. I don't think you need to be a sociopath to be a salesman, but it helps, a lot, in the long run.

Source please. Please to cite the mental health evaluations of your co-workers.....Or better yet, just go ahead and admit that you're talking out you ass.

I don't think that's fair. I also had a difficult door to door sales job when I was a teenager, and you learn quickly that just being nice doesn't get results. You have to pressure people and make them feel uncomfortable about saying no. It really helps if behind your smile you find something to hate about them.

It's not a job I kept up for very long, because I found it difficult to be so cold and two-faced day after day. I didn't want that to become normal. But I think it put me off sales people for life. As soon the friendly fake charisma starts, all I hear is them saying "Look at this stupid fether, lets see how much I can take him for".

So yeah, I would agree with Crablezworth. IMHO being a sociopath (or at least acting like one) is pretty much a requirement in those kinds of hard selling jobs.

I very briefly worked as a waiter, and I made pretty good tips when I did so, but ultimately tipping just feels like a weird anachronism. At my job, if I do well I get promoted or I get a raise (sometimes both), putting the onus on the customer to make that determination is just weird and misplaced, in my opinion. I think just going to a regular normal wage is better for everyone except attractive blonde female bartenders, and I suspect they'll get by in life anyway.

Maybe it's because I am bad at math, maybe because it's never really improved my service, maybe it's because minorities reliably get poorer service because they are perceived bad tippers, maybe it's because it's institutionalized begging in a way, maybe it's because this system sort of screws the cooks who actually make the food in favor of the person who hands it to you, maybe it's because I can't bring myself to tip poorly even for bad service - which essentially makes it a surtax, not a gratuity - but I am not fond of it.

 Smacks wrote:

 focusedfire wrote:

Crablezworth wrote:I worked in sales in my early twenties and the only people who didn't wash out were the sociopaths. I don't think you need to be a sociopath to be a salesman, but it helps, a lot, in the long run.

Source please. Please to cite the mental health evaluations of your co-workers.....Or better yet, just go ahead and admit that you're talking out you ass.

I don't think that's fair. I also had a difficult door to door sales job when I was a teenager, and you learn quickly that just being nice doesn't get results. You have to pressure people and make them feel uncomfortable about saying no. It really helps if behind your smile you find something to hate about them.

It's not a job I kept up for very long, because I found it difficult to be so cold and two-faced day after day. I didn't want that to become normal. But I think it put me off sales people for life. As soon the friendly fake charisma starts, all I hear is them saying "Look at this stupid fether, lets see how much I can take him for".

So yeah, I would agree with Crablezworth. IMHO being a sociopath (or at least acting like one) is pretty much a requirement in those kinds of hard selling jobs.

Imo, I was being kind..

Have been successfully running a small business where we both make our products and sell them.

The secret to our success?

1) Dedication to making the best product we can. This means keeping tabs on not only the quality of our materials and workmanship but also what others that make the same are doing and taking steps that our product is better.

The product is hand made and we offer free repairs for the life of the product with the caveats that it was not damaged intentionally, that item is repairable or through act of "dog".
If item is not repairable due to defect in material or workmanship the customer gets a free replacement.
This year have done 3 free repairs on 23 yo pieces.

2. Our sales people "Never" push, bully, misdirect or deceive the customers. First infraction gets a warning and second gets them taken off of sales for retraining and the third gets them taken off of the schedule....usually permanently.

The secret to good salesmanship is to be friendly, entertaining and honest.(Also helps to have a product you believe in and which sells itself.)
You know what the best sales line in the world is?

Sincerely asking how that person is doing that day. If they reply you then "engage them in honest conversation about what is going on with them. When they get around to asking you what/how you are doing, you honestly tell them that you are working and it is your job to "introduce" them to the product.

If they are interested then you show them the produxt.

If they are not interested, ask them if it is just for now and if they want a business card.

If they want a card, give it to them and then resume your casual conversation until you have another customer or they want to move on.

I they do not want a card, continue casual chat until another customer comes along or they want to leave.


That is it.

For this we pay above min wage or 10% of "the shops" daily sales, whichever is higher.


Imo, If you find yourself lying to and pushing/manipulating the customer then it is either you don't believe in the product or it is a personal character issue.

Later,
ff


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:


*snip* maybe it's because it's institutionalized begging in a way, maybe it's because this system sort of screws the cooks who actually make the food in favor of the person who hands it to you,
*/snip*

We make it a practice to separate great service and great food.

If the food is exceptional my spouse and I make it a policy of tipping the cooks an additional 10% in addition to the waiters tip.

We also will ask to speak to the owner/manager if the food and/or service were above expectations. We thank them for running such an exceptional establishment.

Later,
ff

 focusedfire wrote:
If you find yourself lying to and pushing/manipulating the customer then it is either you don't believe in the product or it is a personal character issue.

I can say categorically that I did not believe in the product. It was utter gak that no one wanted, but that was the job.

I think it's great what you do, admirable even, but it sounds like your product is 'good' and mostly sells itself. That's not really selling it's more supplying. Selling is convincing someone to buy something they would otherwise pass on (and trust me everything is a hard sell when you're cold calling). I agree it's not a nice business, and not something I enjoyed.

 Smacks wrote:

 focusedfire wrote:
If you find yourself lying to and pushing/manipulating the customer then it is either you don't believe in the product or it is a personal character issue.

I can say categorically that I did not believe in the product. It was utter gak that no one wanted, but that was the job.

I think it's great what you do, admirable even, but it sounds like your product is 'good' and mostly sells itself. That's not really selling it's more supplying. Selling is convincing someone to buy something they would otherwise pass on (and trust me everything is a hard sell when you're cold calling). I agree it's not a nice business, and not something I enjoyed.

Hmm, you see while you and I agree that service industry workers should get at least min wage....from there our philosophies differ.

While having a quality product that you believe in helps tremendously. It is not all there is.

Note that my requirements for sales staff are for friendly, entertaining and honest people. I never mandate that they have to believe in the product.
The reason for this is that we can't always find people who are as passionate about our product as we are.
So what do we do when you need sales people?
We find friendly entertaining people who while being honest about the product can sell themselves.

That is the real essence of salesmanship, imo. If the sales person can create an enjoyable pressure free environment the customers will come back because they had a good time.
We freely admit that our product is a non-necessity and have people come back just to visit. These people have no intention of buying the product for use but will often buy something small as a memento.


As to products that sell themselves.

Imo, all products should be that way. If a product won't sell itself then it should go off the market as a failure.


As to selling unwanted or shoddy products for disreputable companies ??
As a salesperson, individuals should do their due diligence as to the company and product they are thinking of representing. If you really don't like the company or the product then you will likely be wasting both yours and the companies time by trying to sell their products.
The second you find yourself lying or manipulating for the sale is the moment you should probably move to a new job.

Example. The spouse and I have both been working for companies that we initially believed in but due to changes in customer service policies, warranties or decreased product quality, we have walked away from very lucrative management positions.
It all comes down to personal choice and beliefs. While I can sell a product that I may not believe in, I refuse to support a product or company that I do not believe in or more importantly dislike.


Please note that none of what I am posting is intended as to taking a shot at anyone. Just trying to express that there are more than a few companies out there looking for honest sales people. That hiring sociopaths is very bad for long term sales and the companies reputation and the companies who want to stick around know this.

Later,
ff