POWER PLAY: TIP THOSE BARTENDERS AND WAITRESSES? MAYBE

In the film "Reservoir Dogs," the character Mr. Pink makes an ironclad argument against tipping. Not the act of knocking things over, that is -- a subject which the movie completely neglects to address -- but the practice of giving servers a gratuity.

His take is that tip-dependent folk are simply doing their jobs and therefore aren't automatically entitled to anything extra.

Yeah, waiters and waitresses often make less than minimum wage and rely on tips to subsidize meager incomes. But as far as Mr. Pink is concerned, that is neither his fault nor his problem.

Although Mr. Pink is a thief and a killer, he apparently also is a staunch consumer advocate. Not a combination one often encounters, even in the realm of fiction.

As Mr. Pink points out, society haphazardly decides who is and who is not tip-worthy. You don't tip when you go into a fast-food joint or into a retail store or when you hire a plumber or read a well-written and insightful newspaper column. However, you do tip when you go into a sit-down restaurant or to the hair stylist or when you order pizza.

Society says to tip certain groups, but forget all other groups. It's so very inconsistent. Aren't there any federal guidelines on this sort of thing? Then again, maybe there are and that's the problem.

Inclusion of pizza guys among the tip-worthy is particularly puzzling as pizza driving isn't so much a job as a good way to kill time. You spend all day driving around smoking cigarettes and listening to loud music. Usually this is considered cruising. But if you drop off the occasional pie, it's gainful employment.

What exactly is tipping supposed to be? Is it: A. A reward for doing an exemplary job; B. A requirement for providing adequate service; or C. A direct subsidy of the employee's hourly wage. Were I Lord and King of the universe, choice A would be the only correct answer. In reality, however, all three apply.

Tipping is a silly tradition. However, I am a convert to Mr. Pink's argument only in theory, not in practice.

As a creature of habit I tend to frequent the same restaurants and pubs. Consistent shoddy tipping eventually leads to the cold shoulder and a longer than anticipated wait for lunch. I like for my dining experiences to run smoothly so I play along with the system and everybody is happy.

But what about punitive non-tipping? Under standard codes of conduct, 15 percent of the bill is the median gratuity. Good or great service yields an increase, a poor job a decrease. Tipping is I suppose meant to be an incentive to provide good service. However, it doesn't necessarily work out that way.

People who do a lousy job -- whatever their occupation -- generally don't admit to themselves, "Gee, I'm really terrible at this." It's much easier on the ego to find a scapegoat. Also, if you admit your failings around the wrong types, you'll likely be told you suffer from lack of self-esteem and encouragement as a child and immediately be shoveled off into some 12-step counseling program only to emerge even more screwed up than before.

A stiffed server is likely to view the absence of a tip as an indication of the stinginess of the customer rather than a reflection on their own performance, and the situation only worsens.

I have been involved in a battle with a barmaid at a pub in my old neighborhood for years. The clash has taken on chicken and egg qualities. She gave lousy service once so I didn't tip her, which led to worse service the next time and so on. Our customer/server relationship has steadily deteriorated to the point of open hostility.

My view is she is a poor employee and hence forfeits any reward. From her perspective, I'm a lousy excuse for an intelligent carbon-based lifeform since I always stiff her.

That is part of the problem. Tipping automatically not only rewards mediocrity but creates an expectation of entitlement.

~Marc Powers is a staff writer for the Southeast Missourian staff.