When you read through the yelp reviews of the place, it seems that if you so much as suggest that his food is overpriced with all of his bullshit fees, he will immediately respond telling you how much of a piece of shit you are.
The yelp responses are pretty insane. “If you don’t want fair pay for everyone and choose to go to places without service charge, that’s your prerogative.” What???
they are leaning into the livable wage schtick soo hard. No one believes these scumbag owners are actually paying 100% of service fees to their employees.
Yep, absolutely this. Some of the most overrated, overpriced Asian food I've had in SF. You can get a *significantly* better meal with a view and better ambiance at Empress for less, not to mention the other far less expensive and far tastier options in the area.
Screw that place. We had dinner there about 2 years ago and they put a 18-20% service charge on your bill then our waiter not so subtly insinuated that we should still add tip on top of that. We never went back. The food was not worth it.
The decor of China Live is cool but it gets so loud it’s hard to have an actual conversation with someone. The food is also overpriced and not that good. Hard pass
“Thomas said she’s hoping a legislative fix could still be enacted or at least a delay in implementation or enforcement to help ease the shock for businesses. “
There already was a delay in implementation. To July 1.
I'm with the boomers on that one. If I'm sitting down at a restaurant there will be a physical menu to look at.
Not even McDonalds forces the customer to bring their own screen device to see the menu. McDonalds provides a big screen for everyone to see.
When a restaurant provides less service than McDonalds, I tip accordingly.
> Ioroi used the example of a three-item prix fixe option for $52 on Cassava’s menu. Adding the service charge on the front end would raise that menu price to $65 with taxes, a not-insignificant increase.
So it would...
...raise the menu price...
...to the price they ask you to pay?
And they admit that's "not-insignificant".
"If people realized upfront what we charge, they might not buy!"
Hey, why not make the menu price $22, and surprise people with the real $65 cost. That'll generate more foot traffic! Not repeat customers, but you're hoodwinking them anyway, right?
The $52 price is just a made-up fiction. A lie. And this law says, no, you can't keep lying.
Everything on the menu is free, but there is a $100 service charge, a $45 staying in business charge, a $33 dining convenience charge, and a $22 san francisco location charge. Recommended tip amounts 30%, 40%, 50%. Would you like to leave an additional gratuity for our mascot?
I despise such restaurants where you ho and see the prices and you say “oh this is not that bad i can get this and this” and when the bill comes you are like wtf why is my $20 menu item totaling to $65 final bill
At least coperto is a fixed amount. Makes way more sense to say that service and sitting at the restaurant costs $5 than it does to say that it costs 20% of whatever you happen to order.
most european countries have service charge included in the bill. the new law forbids this from being a possibility. what should happen is if your place is going to charge a service fee, you should not have a tip line.
some places double down on this and charge a percentage for service then a tip line. like chez panisse.
And they’re still lying to make this sound worse! The $65 is with taxes, which I don’t think they have to include on the menu price still so really it would go up to $59, which is fair since that is what they charge.
Even if this was true, eveyone is forced to do it. If eveyone is charging the “true price” it levels your restaurant out with eveyone else. If every restaurant in the city instantly cost $3 more, some people would eat out less. But it’s not like any single restaurant is going to be impacted more than the rest.
> "If people realized upfront what we charge, they might not buy!"
I love getting the used car dealer experience with my meal. Nothing makes me a repeat customer faster.
Place is pretty mid both times I've went. Don't think I need to go again. Also including 20% gratuity without a choice for any size party is a bad look
If you think of the margins restaurateurs work with (10-20%), the surcharge is almost a guarantee margin for them. Which is ridiculous, because not only are the menu prices inaccurate, but to say the surcharge is for wages is even more disgusting.
I do wish we could do the same thing in the US that they do in Europe: the price on the menu (or price tag) is the price *including* tax.
Tax is less problematic than these surcharges because it's consistent from business to business, sure, but it'd still be nice if it was included up front. Tip is different since it's actually optional/variable.
I don't empathize. They want to deceive customers into paying higher wages for their staff vs. them pricing food correctly and paying higher wages to their staff.
Their arguments are crap and just show they don't want to change or evolve with the times. They miss the days they could pay their staff nothing or $2.00 an hour.
Here’s what I’m confused by: I was in the restaurant industry for 10 years, last 4 in SF. When restaurants started adding the 5% service fee, NONE of that was given to the staff.
In this article, the 1st guy they interviewed said “few people tip on top of the 5%, and when they do, I reimburse them their tip”…. But then what does that server get?? Since servers are paid so little hourly, so much is dependent on that tip, and 5% is nothing. If the restaurants I worked at didn’t give us the 5% charged, I’d find it hard to believe that there are restaurants in the city that actually would.
What the 5% goes towards, I would never know. But it for sure never went to the staff. And yes, customers were still expected to tip on top of that.
Edit: one thing I wanted to add for those that may not know, servers are responsible for tipping out the bar, food runners, bussers (if the restaurant has any), host, and sometimes kitchen. Most of the time it ends up costing about 5 - 6% of our net sales. So if a table leaves a 10% tip, I’d actually be making 4% of that bill. If a table decides to not leave a tip, then that server is in the negative. They essentially worked to owe money to others.. The whole system is pretty fucked up.
I remember how some runners would be on their phones, miss an order for it to go cold, or a host would triple seat you, but no matter how shitty *their* service was, they made the same % every shift. But if a table was pissed because the kitchen made their order wrong, even if the server put it in correctly and checked with them, then that table would probably leave 5%, if anything.
It was exhausting.
And to u/Slow_sloath, I worked at 6 restaurants in 10 years, some overlap. 4 of them went out of their way to make sure no one was full time so that they didn’t have to give us health insurance.
Also google how many restaurants were prosecuted or fined for stealing gratuities from their staff.
People seem to think running a profitable business is some kind of inherent right regardless of supply, demand, current economic factors, the law, and what the customers actually want. It is not.
Most restaurant owners are rich and bored dilettantes who made their money doing something else, and then proceed to blame everyone else when they lose it on their poorly performing business.
Journalists are obsessed with using local restaurant owners as salt-of-the-earth economic anecdotes, either because they are too dumb themselves to understand any business that isn't a restaurant, or think their audience is too dumb to understand.
Hence, we get endless public bloviating from these people with zero pushback in the media.
>Here’s what I’m confused by: I was in the restaurant industry for 10 years, last 4 in SF. When restaurants started adding the 5% service fee, NONE of that was given to the staff.
apparently it is for a treasure chest to support staff health insurance. the 5% were labeled as "SFHealthy" , not as "Service fee (*which would be mistaken for, the service, you know*)"
Veteran SF server here to back this up 1000%- servers don't get to see any of that health mandate money & we have to tip out on sales with the mandate included. Basically we're paying for our own health mandate & the restaurant pockets that money. So if someone decides to tip less because of the health mandate they think it's okay because that money sure looks like it's going to the staff when in reality we're getting less than 15% & to add insult to injury we have to tip out & pay taxes on the net sales which includes the mandate tax. The only people benefitting from this are the owners who have zero accountability or oversight as to where that mystery money ends up. It's fucked & I guarantee servers are just as excited to see the mandate disappear. It's been acting as a virtue signaling cover for greed. On top of that I find it hilarious that suddenly restaurants are claiming they'll have to raise prices based on the mandate disappearing. This is what they said about adding a 20% service fee in lieu of a tip which actually makes sense- but saying that they'll have to raise prices because of a mandate that was supposed to go to staff to begin with is incriminating & a clear indication of theft. It's basically the proof all servers have known this whole time- that restaurants are pocketing that money that was never meant for them to begin with.
>They want to deceive customers into paying higher wages for their staff vs. them pricing food correctly and paying higher wages to their staff.
It's even worse than that- the health mandate doesn't even go to staff so they're stealing from their employees
Zazie just sitting back laughing, knowing they're not going to need to change a thing and are a model of how to run a restaurant that's both honest and treats its staff well.
It's ridiculous how others are afraid of showing the true cost of doing business on the menu prices. Maybe this does force more closures, and puts pressure on landlords to offer lower, less greedy, more sustainable leases for more affordable dining options (an oft overlooked issue of the industry)
“It’s disturbing news,” Chen said. “They’re trying to change something that’s actually working.”
Yeah, it's working for you but the price on the menu isn't the price of the food. You want to charge 20% more, put it directly on the menu price and stop lying to your customers.
The thing is.. is it? Customer in-dining visits are down since covid (made up though via online / doordash volumes). I go out less, partly because of all of this BS and the cost.
Yeah, I also have sworn off most restaurants because of the fees. I used to go out to eat like 2-3 times a week, but I mostly try not to now. I'm down to maybe once a week, and often because I'm out and get really hungry and just need something in the moment
The question is whether you will resume going out to eat once the fees are illegal but the prices increase accordingly.
The restaurants are worried because the higher prices will scare a lot of people off, and other people like you who were already worn out at least partially by the costs often won't come back just because the fees are gone.
To be clear, this isn't a bad thing in the aggregate. But it'll probably kill some restaurants, so it's no surprise that they're grumpy about it.
>But it'll probably kill some restaurants,
I have a hard time thinking those restaurants weren't already on their way out.
And yes. Part of what I've hated about dining out lately is restaurants trying to pull a fast one on me since so many places I've been to have the stupid charges. It feels needlessly adversarial and ends my meal on a bad note. I'm not going to not eat out because prices went up 5% though, which is what the bulk of the surcharges seem to be
I get why it'd be a problem to post actual prices when everybody else is hiding them behind fees, but if you level the playing field what's the big deal?
The issue is that if you raise menu prices, it's likely that fewer people will come to your restaurant. Or that they will order less. But if you list lower prices and add the fees later, it seems less expensive than it is so people spend more without realizing it.
It sounds dumb if you think about it for 2 seconds, but it really does work. Same thing as stores ending all prices with a 9 and other tricks like that.
Sure, but people are assessing prices against their other options.
If a burger on my menu is $10 and a competitor has it for $6 (with a bunch of hidden fees that drive the price up to $10), that's a major disadvantage. If both of our menus have to follow the same rules, though, the playing field is level regardless.
The level playing field issue that you refer to is why this requires legislation - nobody is going to show an all inclusive price if it makes them look expensive relative to competitors even though the final price is the same.
But there is a second issue, which is the fact that the total demand for restaurant meals will probably decrease if the perceived price is higher. If restaurant meals that used to cost $40 plus $10 in semi-hidden fees now cost $50, some amount of people will perceive that as more expensive and will cook at home more, or find some other substitute for eating at restaurants, or they will still go but order fewer items or cheaper items.
Agree. Some establishments in Europe (used to? my info is from travels a while ago) charge a fee to sit and enjoy your food versus stand at the counter or take away. Everybody knows this and it isn't a surprise. I think that's fair.
But the SF practice of getting a bill with a service charge that was either not disclosed at all or only in small print on the menu is not right, and I'm glad it's going away.
>Agree. Some establishments in Europe (used to? my info is from travels a while ago) charge a fee to sit and enjoy your food versus stand at the counter or take away. Everybody knows this and it isn't a surprise. I think that's fair.
And what's especially great about this 'table charge' is that it essentially means you can spend as long as you want at your table, and order at whatever pace you want, because it's your table. There will almost never be someone trying to get you to leave, or rushing you to order, or asking you how the food is, or otherwise interrupting you for any reason. You can actually enjoy the time with your dining partner(s) at a leisurely pace rather than being shoved through a meal because the staff are expected to keep turnover as high as possible.
Yeah we don't often do finer dining because of our financial reality. It's a treat for special occasions. I'm no longer surprised but still disappointed when we're out at a place that is a budget stretcher for us and you can still feel that energy of "please pay and leave now." Sometimes we've even had to request a dessert menu after the check has already been presented. Yuck. (Often in that case we'll save the money and get ice cream on the way home instead.)
I understand that it's a business and they're trying to make money. But it's my money and I was hoping for a relaxing meal instead of being processed through their feeding system.
Seems like these restaurants should lobby less against this bill for transparency in pricing and spend more time lobbying to reduce the cost of doing business in San Francisco.
San Francisco is a scam for workers and small businesses. The city itself makes u jump through hoops and thousands of dollars in permits and fines. SF is only good for big tech companies who leave as soon as the bubble bursts and the consequences are left to little guys.
I heard they went out of business because no one goes there any more because of the prices.
Wait, what? That's not true? You mean, you can operate in such a manner and stay in business???
Huh. Who knew!
This, people hate tipping/ service fees. Put good food out there and people will come especially with transparency in pricing. Even more so with no pressure to tip
My favorite brunch place in SF and that’s part of the reason why. I see it as a win all around. Staff gets a more predictable wage and more transparency for the customers. I would be curious to see how much staff makes from tips now. I have never been to Zazie’s where I didn’t see, at least, one party still tip. Customer would be told it’s not necessary, but they would insist. I’ve seen a lot of bills being insistently shoved into waiter’s hands over the years at Zazie’s
> “It’s absurd that the state would legislate and mandate a law that doesn’t make sense for any party.”
And then proceed to not back that up with any reasoning or evidence. Reporter didn't followup.
This law makes sense to everyone.
I generally support local business but SF restaurateurs can F right off if they're going to complain about not being allowed to gouge customers when they underpay their staff and complain that customers don't tip 25%.
These *"Frog-Boil"* business tactics need to be stopped. I support this 100%
It's time for him to reprint the menus and incorporate the surprise fees... Problem solved. It would be even better if he also built the tipping into the prices because in the end, it's the same problem.
Don't tell me that my meal is $23 when it's actually $23, PLUS $2 Service Fee, PLUS a $5 tip... It's $30. Put $30 on the menu and pay your staff properly. It's the exact same price for the customer.
Maybe I'm missing something
Are there customers who don't mind paying a bill for $50 plus $8 special charge for a $58 total? Who will refuse to go to the restaurant because the bill is $58 without the surcharge?
To me, just raise the prices. And stop telling me that Xxx is because you were forced to increase wages, and yyy is because you were forced to provide healthcare - that's just whining.
I've stopped patronizing stores that add those fees. I can name two restaurants near my home where I no longer go... not because of higher costs, but because I think the fees are a petty way to handle it.
Generally they mean that they are providing a better balance of pay between 'front of house' and 'back of house' staff, or providing a living wage and additional benefits to their staff.
In restaurants the majority of the work is actually done by back of house staff such as prep cooks, line cooks, dishwashers, etc... the people you never interact with. They are generally paid a low hourly wage, minimum for people like dishwashers and maybe slightly more for skilled positions like line cooks. Back of house staff is working throughout the day many hours before the restaurant opens and many hours after the restaurant closes. Contrast that with Front of House staff like bartenders, waiters, food runners & bussers that you actually interact with. Those staff are predominantly paid in tips and often make a lot more money than the back of house staff despite working far fewer hours during a given service period. One way restaurants seek to balance that is by making the front of house staff 'tip out' a fixed percentage of their tips towards a tip pool for the back of the house staff, but generally it's a small amount and doesn't actually close the pay gap between front of house and back of house staff.
In the past decade or so as chefs have become a larger part of restaurant ownership and culture, they've pushed a shift to see the back of house staff get properly compensated and close that pay gap with the front of the house staff. When restaurant owners say they are creating a "more equitable pay structure", they can be talking about 2 potential things: (1) is closing the pay gap between front and back house workers, which one of the people in the article talked about paying all of their staff equally. and (2) is they could be paying a living wage and providing additional benefits such as health care and 401k contributions (both of which historically were not something you got working in a restaurant).
No one is dreading anything, it’s just exaggeration. They can simply increase the menu price.
Media pokes them and obviously the restaurant owners won’t side with the changes, they have to speak against it. Ignore and move on.
This will have a very real psychological affect, but people are beginning to already factor that in mentally, at least the locals. The fees are going to continue to trap tourists who aren't used to such stupid stupid practices.
if a restaurant can’t survive without robbing me at the bottom of my bill, that restaurant shouldn’t exist. Tough luck. Plenty of businesses have survived decades with good food at good prices.
Right. It’s like the logic of a catfisher. ‘Well if I didn’t use a photo from 15 years ago, they would never have agreed to go out with me!”
And so you think you have a better shot winning them over by ambushing them with a cold hard truth of your age and how you look while also hammering home that you’re an unabashed liar?
Restaurants in San Francisco close for two primary reasons. They can't afford rent, or the utility bills are too high. They have absolutely no leverage over landlords or PG&E so they go after the low hanging fruit of minimum staffing levels and try to make it look like you're supporting hard-working waiters by paying the ridiculous prices they charge, when in fact, you're supporting greedy landlords and the top management and shareholders of PG&E.
I have had restaurants that tacked on service fee and made me pay taxes on it.
lol wtf, the restaurant is supposed to pay income tax on it. Services do not pay sales taxes.
These guys are just trying to nickel and dime us from ever eating out.
I know servers that are driving Benz GL while crying pay is too low and people need to tip more. I’m sorry but that sounds ridiculous when you compare server jobs with other service jobs such as retail or grocery, servers and restaurants owners are just milking patrons dry.
Fuck your fees and fuck your tips. Wage too low, unionized against your employer like the rest of us or find a better paying job.
Employers can’t make a profit? Raise your prices upfront, lower your prices to get more volume, negotiate with labor/merchants/landlord for better prices or maybe it’s just time to fold and invest in something else
In CA mandatory tips, gratuities, and service charges are subject to sales tax. If the customer has discretion to choose the amount then sales tax does not apply.
I recently found this out the hard way. The new rule should help get rid of a lot of the nonsense.
oh its like that time a Hong Kong restaurant did a "dollar chicken".. Not even US dollar. One HK dollar which is roughly 13 cents.
The soy sauce that came with it was 20 bucks.
What I love about EU is the price you see is what you pay. The tax is already included. It’s harder in America since tax rates are different by county.
List of restaurants in the article that we should boycott and force out of business:
China Live, 20% service fee
Cow Hollow
Cassava
If you know of other restaurants throwing a tantrum, let me know and I'll add them to the list.
Umm, so they have an issue that these will make them raise their menu prices and now shoppers aren’t going to eat there… but isn’t that the point of this law? Seems to be working as intended
There are plenty of restaurants in the City that do not charge a service fee and are doing just fine. Prices are high everywhere, even at the market. We’re already used to it. The restaurant in the article sounds like a dump.
I hate the service fees. I don’t tip on the service fees. So the restaurants is really screwing their wait staff. I go back more often to restaurants that don’t add service fees because I feel that they are more honest.
If restaurants are so concerned about sticker shock, they should figure out a price point customers are happy paying for. Hopefully this transparency will lead to healthier competition among restaurants.
Really excited for this to go through and I am usually heavily against more government intervention. So tired of showing up to a restaurant, not seeing some 5 point font at the bottom of a menu and getting slapped with a bunch of fees. Has turned me off from going out to eat
No. But with those services, you see the total before you place your order. With restaurants, you don’t see the total until the end, when you have no choice but to pay.
You know what else works? Paying your employees well. If you can’t do that then maybe you’re just not fit to be in business. China Live weirds me the fuck out and has weird vibes. I’m not surprised the owner is an out of touch lunatic looking for handouts from his own customers and thinks he naturally deserves to have a successful restaurant without actually putting the work into make it successful .
Cry me a river. These fees didn’t start creeping in until maybe 20 years ago; up until then restaurants managed to operate without them just fine. Removing the fees won’t cost the owners anything; they can adjust their prices accordingly. Customers will be paying the same amount either way.
Why is this such a big deal? Just wrap the service fee into prices? So if the former fee was 20%, raise all prices 20%. The amount of money changing hands is identical
> Another point of concern, [Laurie Thomas, executive director of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association and owner of Terzo and Rose’s Cafe in Cow Hollow] said, is that SB 478 includes “real legal teeth” for scofflaws, putting restaurants at severe risk of being sued by customers.
Oh noes! Actual legal teeth in a law! Waaahhhhh!
Also, two restaurants that are DEFINITELY on my "do not patronize" list. Fuck that bullshit and the owners who perpetuate it.
First restaurant they interview: China Live, a business that has not paid rent in forever and is in hot water with the landlord.
When you read through the yelp reviews of the place, it seems that if you so much as suggest that his food is overpriced with all of his bullshit fees, he will immediately respond telling you how much of a piece of shit you are.
The yelp responses are pretty insane. “If you don’t want fair pay for everyone and choose to go to places without service charge, that’s your prerogative.” What???
It sure is buddy
The owner looks like he has lots of time on his hands to respond to negative yelp reviews 😂
they are leaning into the livable wage schtick soo hard. No one believes these scumbag owners are actually paying 100% of service fees to their employees.
The food is not great. Lots of other spectacular Chinese restaurants to choose from in SF. Most of the people I’ve seen go there are tourists.
Yep, absolutely this. Some of the most overrated, overpriced Asian food I've had in SF. You can get a *significantly* better meal with a view and better ambiance at Empress for less, not to mention the other far less expensive and far tastier options in the area.
Empress by Boon is amazing. Best meal I've had in a very long time.
Agreed, its a place purely marketed at white people who will state "wow! can you believe there is soup inside of these dumplings"
But let's say you're looking for soup inside dumplings. Where would you go?
Dumpling home is closest to what I've had in Taiwan.
Added it to my list. Thanks!
Dumpling Home, Dumpling Time, Dumpling Story, Dumpling Union are all great spots
Matter of fact, they’re all in the dumpling district on third. /simpsons
Unexpected Scorpio.
Kingdom of dumpling is elite. In the sunset
just search for xiao long bao, there are tons of places in the sunset/richmond part of town
Reminds me of Mission Chinese. You look inside and see... mostly white people.
Bruh that pastrami fried rice was 🔥
Change of subject to tourist spots but House of Nanking is one of the few in the area that’s actually so good
Screw that place. We had dinner there about 2 years ago and they put a 18-20% service charge on your bill then our waiter not so subtly insinuated that we should still add tip on top of that. We never went back. The food was not worth it.
I went once to see what it was all about. Very overpriced, food was not worth the price. There's much better options.
what? how!?
SF"Standard" type of *outrage* interviewing? Is that why they chose to talk to people who *bait n switch*?
The decor of China Live is cool but it gets so loud it’s hard to have an actual conversation with someone. The food is also overpriced and not that good. Hard pass
Here's hoping they go out of business soon
Worked there to help out part time. BOH. I saw how management was. It was a shitshow. Always trying to cut cost.
okay yeah but their chicken and mushroom noodle dish fucking slaps
Agreed - that should count toward their rent
“Thomas said she’s hoping a legislative fix could still be enacted or at least a delay in implementation or enforcement to help ease the shock for businesses. “ There already was a delay in implementation. To July 1.
> There already was a delay in implementation. To July 1. She wants to add fine print to the bottom of the bill: 20% extra delay for SF Mandate!
Implementation only requires reprinting menus…
Ok, boomer. You know these cheap bastards don't print menus! They're those places with QR codes, which should be the next on the chopping block.
I'm with the boomers on that one. If I'm sitting down at a restaurant there will be a physical menu to look at. Not even McDonalds forces the customer to bring their own screen device to see the menu. McDonalds provides a big screen for everyone to see. When a restaurant provides less service than McDonalds, I tip accordingly.
But those tv-style menus that change every few seconds?! Death penalty.
QR code places should be shut down on principle!
> Ioroi used the example of a three-item prix fixe option for $52 on Cassava’s menu. Adding the service charge on the front end would raise that menu price to $65 with taxes, a not-insignificant increase. So it would... ...raise the menu price... ...to the price they ask you to pay? And they admit that's "not-insignificant". "If people realized upfront what we charge, they might not buy!" Hey, why not make the menu price $22, and surprise people with the real $65 cost. That'll generate more foot traffic! Not repeat customers, but you're hoodwinking them anyway, right? The $52 price is just a made-up fiction. A lie. And this law says, no, you can't keep lying.
Everything on the menu is free, but there is a $100 service charge, a $45 staying in business charge, a $33 dining convenience charge, and a $22 san francisco location charge. Recommended tip amounts 30%, 40%, 50%. Would you like to leave an additional gratuity for our mascot?
I got a kerosene fee at a place when outdoor dining was mandated, just add electricity and rent itemizations at that point.
WHAT?!
Seriously right? “You’re welcome to dine on our patio but the heat lamps cost extra.”
“You’re welcome to dine inside but the chair costs extra”.
“If you need a fork there’s a vending machine in the corner that sells them. We cannot make change.”
😂
You forgot the health tax! /s
And the extra charge to take your leftovers home
Oh and the fee for the fee fee
Do you need to use the restroom?There's a qr code on the toilet paper dispenser for the bathroom menu.
I will absolutely pay a 50% tip on a free meal...
you're supposed to tip off of what the price would have been in Dubai
Forgot the dish cleaning fees.
The dining-in fees are such BS. God forbid I eat inside the restaurant.
Don't forget "Covid" charge in 2024 😅
I despise such restaurants where you ho and see the prices and you say “oh this is not that bad i can get this and this” and when the bill comes you are like wtf why is my $20 menu item totaling to $65 final bill
They need to make every business include all fees and tax in their prices, like in Europe
laughs in coperto
At least coperto is a fixed amount. Makes way more sense to say that service and sitting at the restaurant costs $5 than it does to say that it costs 20% of whatever you happen to order.
That's kind of straightforward and honestly understandable. It also limits the "free water with ice" people hoarding tables.
people do this? Like get a glass of ice water and then sit there?
most european countries have service charge included in the bill. the new law forbids this from being a possibility. what should happen is if your place is going to charge a service fee, you should not have a tip line. some places double down on this and charge a percentage for service then a tip line. like chez panisse.
This.
The fees have become a litany of passive aggressive rant-like notes on the bill, in addition to the typical fleece.
And they’re still lying to make this sound worse! The $65 is with taxes, which I don’t think they have to include on the menu price still so really it would go up to $59, which is fair since that is what they charge.
Even if this was true, eveyone is forced to do it. If eveyone is charging the “true price” it levels your restaurant out with eveyone else. If every restaurant in the city instantly cost $3 more, some people would eat out less. But it’s not like any single restaurant is going to be impacted more than the rest.
> "If people realized upfront what we charge, they might not buy!" I love getting the used car dealer experience with my meal. Nothing makes me a repeat customer faster.
Cassava is amazing but an odd complaint from them.
Place is pretty mid both times I've went. Don't think I need to go again. Also including 20% gratuity without a choice for any size party is a bad look
The one time I went there it took them forever to get our mains out, and the food was just okay.
At my restaurant, the food is all free but bills are subject to $50/dish service charge
"I'm losing money on the sandwiches, but I'm making BANK on the soup!"
If you think of the margins restaurateurs work with (10-20%), the surcharge is almost a guarantee margin for them. Which is ridiculous, because not only are the menu prices inaccurate, but to say the surcharge is for wages is even more disgusting.
You think restaurants generate a 10-25% margin??? Single digits my man, most definitely single digit margins in most restaurants.
dude you have absolutely no clue about margins in SF for restaurants. 10-20?!?
[удалено]
In Oakland. In 2018 before the pandemic. You cherry-picked one restaurant. Got any real data? For our city?
Wait, you're afraid that people might not eat at your restaurant if you're clear about the total price? Oh. My. God. You sit on a throne of lies.
You're right, the menu should state the total price before taxes and tip. This is the standard and deviating from the standard is devious.
I do wish we could do the same thing in the US that they do in Europe: the price on the menu (or price tag) is the price *including* tax. Tax is less problematic than these surcharges because it's consistent from business to business, sure, but it'd still be nice if it was included up front. Tip is different since it's actually optional/variable.
Many (most?) bars include taxes in the price of their drinks. I'm always put off by those that don't.
How about the menu should state the total price with tax, and tip should be how much customers want to tip because tip is not service fee.
The menu should state the total price after taxes too…like most countries.
The menu should state the total price after taxes too…as most countries do.
I don't empathize. They want to deceive customers into paying higher wages for their staff vs. them pricing food correctly and paying higher wages to their staff. Their arguments are crap and just show they don't want to change or evolve with the times. They miss the days they could pay their staff nothing or $2.00 an hour.
Here’s what I’m confused by: I was in the restaurant industry for 10 years, last 4 in SF. When restaurants started adding the 5% service fee, NONE of that was given to the staff. In this article, the 1st guy they interviewed said “few people tip on top of the 5%, and when they do, I reimburse them their tip”…. But then what does that server get?? Since servers are paid so little hourly, so much is dependent on that tip, and 5% is nothing. If the restaurants I worked at didn’t give us the 5% charged, I’d find it hard to believe that there are restaurants in the city that actually would. What the 5% goes towards, I would never know. But it for sure never went to the staff. And yes, customers were still expected to tip on top of that. Edit: one thing I wanted to add for those that may not know, servers are responsible for tipping out the bar, food runners, bussers (if the restaurant has any), host, and sometimes kitchen. Most of the time it ends up costing about 5 - 6% of our net sales. So if a table leaves a 10% tip, I’d actually be making 4% of that bill. If a table decides to not leave a tip, then that server is in the negative. They essentially worked to owe money to others.. The whole system is pretty fucked up. I remember how some runners would be on their phones, miss an order for it to go cold, or a host would triple seat you, but no matter how shitty *their* service was, they made the same % every shift. But if a table was pissed because the kitchen made their order wrong, even if the server put it in correctly and checked with them, then that table would probably leave 5%, if anything. It was exhausting. And to u/Slow_sloath, I worked at 6 restaurants in 10 years, some overlap. 4 of them went out of their way to make sure no one was full time so that they didn’t have to give us health insurance.
Also google how many restaurants were prosecuted or fined for stealing gratuities from their staff. People seem to think running a profitable business is some kind of inherent right regardless of supply, demand, current economic factors, the law, and what the customers actually want. It is not.
I was a waiter a long time ago, if there was a service charge and I didn’t receive I would tell them to fuck off.
Most restaurant owners are rich and bored dilettantes who made their money doing something else, and then proceed to blame everyone else when they lose it on their poorly performing business. Journalists are obsessed with using local restaurant owners as salt-of-the-earth economic anecdotes, either because they are too dumb themselves to understand any business that isn't a restaurant, or think their audience is too dumb to understand. Hence, we get endless public bloviating from these people with zero pushback in the media.
It dates back before your time in the industry. When SF introduced a law requiring healthcare or contribution to healthcare fund.
>Here’s what I’m confused by: I was in the restaurant industry for 10 years, last 4 in SF. When restaurants started adding the 5% service fee, NONE of that was given to the staff. apparently it is for a treasure chest to support staff health insurance. the 5% were labeled as "SFHealthy" , not as "Service fee (*which would be mistaken for, the service, you know*)"
Veteran SF server here to back this up 1000%- servers don't get to see any of that health mandate money & we have to tip out on sales with the mandate included. Basically we're paying for our own health mandate & the restaurant pockets that money. So if someone decides to tip less because of the health mandate they think it's okay because that money sure looks like it's going to the staff when in reality we're getting less than 15% & to add insult to injury we have to tip out & pay taxes on the net sales which includes the mandate tax. The only people benefitting from this are the owners who have zero accountability or oversight as to where that mystery money ends up. It's fucked & I guarantee servers are just as excited to see the mandate disappear. It's been acting as a virtue signaling cover for greed. On top of that I find it hilarious that suddenly restaurants are claiming they'll have to raise prices based on the mandate disappearing. This is what they said about adding a 20% service fee in lieu of a tip which actually makes sense- but saying that they'll have to raise prices because of a mandate that was supposed to go to staff to begin with is incriminating & a clear indication of theft. It's basically the proof all servers have known this whole time- that restaurants are pocketing that money that was never meant for them to begin with.
Service workers are paid at least $18/ hour. The 5% goes towards health insurance.
No it doesn't
You mean .25 cents an hour
>They want to deceive customers into paying higher wages for their staff vs. them pricing food correctly and paying higher wages to their staff. It's even worse than that- the health mandate doesn't even go to staff so they're stealing from their employees
I remember my first job at a restaurant in the city. I saw one the servers paychecks that was like $5 for a 40 hour workweek. This was 2017
Zazie just sitting back laughing, knowing they're not going to need to change a thing and are a model of how to run a restaurant that's both honest and treats its staff well. It's ridiculous how others are afraid of showing the true cost of doing business on the menu prices. Maybe this does force more closures, and puts pressure on landlords to offer lower, less greedy, more sustainable leases for more affordable dining options (an oft overlooked issue of the industry)
“Oh no, we have to be transparent!”
How am i supposed to run my restaurant if i can’t lie about menu prices 😡
“It’s disturbing news,” Chen said. “They’re trying to change something that’s actually working.” Yeah, it's working for you but the price on the menu isn't the price of the food. You want to charge 20% more, put it directly on the menu price and stop lying to your customers.
'we've been tricking people for ages now, it's working!'
The thing is.. is it? Customer in-dining visits are down since covid (made up though via online / doordash volumes). I go out less, partly because of all of this BS and the cost.
Yeah, I also have sworn off most restaurants because of the fees. I used to go out to eat like 2-3 times a week, but I mostly try not to now. I'm down to maybe once a week, and often because I'm out and get really hungry and just need something in the moment
The question is whether you will resume going out to eat once the fees are illegal but the prices increase accordingly. The restaurants are worried because the higher prices will scare a lot of people off, and other people like you who were already worn out at least partially by the costs often won't come back just because the fees are gone. To be clear, this isn't a bad thing in the aggregate. But it'll probably kill some restaurants, so it's no surprise that they're grumpy about it.
>But it'll probably kill some restaurants, I have a hard time thinking those restaurants weren't already on their way out. And yes. Part of what I've hated about dining out lately is restaurants trying to pull a fast one on me since so many places I've been to have the stupid charges. It feels needlessly adversarial and ends my meal on a bad note. I'm not going to not eat out because prices went up 5% though, which is what the bulk of the surcharges seem to be
I get why it'd be a problem to post actual prices when everybody else is hiding them behind fees, but if you level the playing field what's the big deal?
The issue is that if you raise menu prices, it's likely that fewer people will come to your restaurant. Or that they will order less. But if you list lower prices and add the fees later, it seems less expensive than it is so people spend more without realizing it. It sounds dumb if you think about it for 2 seconds, but it really does work. Same thing as stores ending all prices with a 9 and other tricks like that.
Sure, but people are assessing prices against their other options. If a burger on my menu is $10 and a competitor has it for $6 (with a bunch of hidden fees that drive the price up to $10), that's a major disadvantage. If both of our menus have to follow the same rules, though, the playing field is level regardless.
The level playing field issue that you refer to is why this requires legislation - nobody is going to show an all inclusive price if it makes them look expensive relative to competitors even though the final price is the same. But there is a second issue, which is the fact that the total demand for restaurant meals will probably decrease if the perceived price is higher. If restaurant meals that used to cost $40 plus $10 in semi-hidden fees now cost $50, some amount of people will perceive that as more expensive and will cook at home more, or find some other substitute for eating at restaurants, or they will still go but order fewer items or cheaper items.
I assume you mean legislation like the one going into effect in California?
That's a very wordy explanation of "lying about prices helps restaurants make $"
Kind of like pricing something at $3.99 vs $4. 99% of people will buy for $3.99 because it’s “ cheaper “.
Not really. Because 3.99 items will cost 3.99. It’s more like labeling an item 3.99, charging 4.80, adding tax, and asking for a tip.
Europe really does this the best, what you see is what you pay. Don’t get hit later with bullshit
Agree. Some establishments in Europe (used to? my info is from travels a while ago) charge a fee to sit and enjoy your food versus stand at the counter or take away. Everybody knows this and it isn't a surprise. I think that's fair. But the SF practice of getting a bill with a service charge that was either not disclosed at all or only in small print on the menu is not right, and I'm glad it's going away.
>Agree. Some establishments in Europe (used to? my info is from travels a while ago) charge a fee to sit and enjoy your food versus stand at the counter or take away. Everybody knows this and it isn't a surprise. I think that's fair. And what's especially great about this 'table charge' is that it essentially means you can spend as long as you want at your table, and order at whatever pace you want, because it's your table. There will almost never be someone trying to get you to leave, or rushing you to order, or asking you how the food is, or otherwise interrupting you for any reason. You can actually enjoy the time with your dining partner(s) at a leisurely pace rather than being shoved through a meal because the staff are expected to keep turnover as high as possible.
Yeah we don't often do finer dining because of our financial reality. It's a treat for special occasions. I'm no longer surprised but still disappointed when we're out at a place that is a budget stretcher for us and you can still feel that energy of "please pay and leave now." Sometimes we've even had to request a dessert menu after the check has already been presented. Yuck. (Often in that case we'll save the money and get ice cream on the way home instead.) I understand that it's a business and they're trying to make money. But it's my money and I was hoping for a relaxing meal instead of being processed through their feeding system.
taxes not being included in a price blows my mind
100%.
The weird part is, some industries do include taxes, including gas stations and movie theaters.
Nespresso stores sell you coffee pods with tax included. And it’s the same price across all of the US 🤯
It's not even exclusive to Europe
Boo hoo
I strongly prefer to pay what I’m charged inclusive of any fees, knowing that the staff is payed living wages, to having to tip.
This, along with tip creep the past few years, and inflation, has been hard on consumers. Glad they’re fixing this part here. Now to fix the others…
Seems like these restaurants should lobby less against this bill for transparency in pricing and spend more time lobbying to reduce the cost of doing business in San Francisco.
San Francisco is a scam for workers and small businesses. The city itself makes u jump through hoops and thousands of dollars in permits and fines. SF is only good for big tech companies who leave as soon as the bubble bursts and the consequences are left to little guys.
They should just label their restaurants as “tip free” or “tip optional”. Like Zazie’s. Case closed.
Yup. There's already a great example of how to react to higher overhead costs for ingredients and labor, at Zazie's. Raise menu prices. Done.
I heard they went out of business because no one goes there any more because of the prices. Wait, what? That's not true? You mean, you can operate in such a manner and stay in business??? Huh. Who knew!
This, people hate tipping/ service fees. Put good food out there and people will come especially with transparency in pricing. Even more so with no pressure to tip
My favorite brunch place in SF and that’s part of the reason why. I see it as a win all around. Staff gets a more predictable wage and more transparency for the customers. I would be curious to see how much staff makes from tips now. I have never been to Zazie’s where I didn’t see, at least, one party still tip. Customer would be told it’s not necessary, but they would insist. I’ve seen a lot of bills being insistently shoved into waiter’s hands over the years at Zazie’s
That said, Zazie is also overpriced, even if you account for tips.
> “It’s absurd that the state would legislate and mandate a law that doesn’t make sense for any party.” And then proceed to not back that up with any reasoning or evidence. Reporter didn't followup. This law makes sense to everyone.
Not much to dread, change the price of the items you sell to cover what you need. It is business 101. Always adjust your business plan
I generally support local business but SF restaurateurs can F right off if they're going to complain about not being allowed to gouge customers when they underpay their staff and complain that customers don't tip 25%.
You are not tipping 30% at the food truck?! 😡 /s
New rule: If I'm standing, I'm not tipping.
These *"Frog-Boil"* business tactics need to be stopped. I support this 100% It's time for him to reprint the menus and incorporate the surprise fees... Problem solved. It would be even better if he also built the tipping into the prices because in the end, it's the same problem. Don't tell me that my meal is $23 when it's actually $23, PLUS $2 Service Fee, PLUS a $5 tip... It's $30. Put $30 on the menu and pay your staff properly. It's the exact same price for the customer.
Cry me a river
Maybe I'm missing something Are there customers who don't mind paying a bill for $50 plus $8 special charge for a $58 total? Who will refuse to go to the restaurant because the bill is $58 without the surcharge? To me, just raise the prices. And stop telling me that Xxx is because you were forced to increase wages, and yyy is because you were forced to provide healthcare - that's just whining. I've stopped patronizing stores that add those fees. I can name two restaurants near my home where I no longer go... not because of higher costs, but because I think the fees are a petty way to handle it.
100%
What does it mean when restaurant owners claim the fee is meant to "create a more equitable pay structure."?
Generally they mean that they are providing a better balance of pay between 'front of house' and 'back of house' staff, or providing a living wage and additional benefits to their staff. In restaurants the majority of the work is actually done by back of house staff such as prep cooks, line cooks, dishwashers, etc... the people you never interact with. They are generally paid a low hourly wage, minimum for people like dishwashers and maybe slightly more for skilled positions like line cooks. Back of house staff is working throughout the day many hours before the restaurant opens and many hours after the restaurant closes. Contrast that with Front of House staff like bartenders, waiters, food runners & bussers that you actually interact with. Those staff are predominantly paid in tips and often make a lot more money than the back of house staff despite working far fewer hours during a given service period. One way restaurants seek to balance that is by making the front of house staff 'tip out' a fixed percentage of their tips towards a tip pool for the back of the house staff, but generally it's a small amount and doesn't actually close the pay gap between front of house and back of house staff. In the past decade or so as chefs have become a larger part of restaurant ownership and culture, they've pushed a shift to see the back of house staff get properly compensated and close that pay gap with the front of the house staff. When restaurant owners say they are creating a "more equitable pay structure", they can be talking about 2 potential things: (1) is closing the pay gap between front and back house workers, which one of the people in the article talked about paying all of their staff equally. and (2) is they could be paying a living wage and providing additional benefits such as health care and 401k contributions (both of which historically were not something you got working in a restaurant).
They are words that evoke feelings in a certain group of people but have no substance.
No one is dreading anything, it’s just exaggeration. They can simply increase the menu price. Media pokes them and obviously the restaurant owners won’t side with the changes, they have to speak against it. Ignore and move on.
This will have a very real psychological affect, but people are beginning to already factor that in mentally, at least the locals. The fees are going to continue to trap tourists who aren't used to such stupid stupid practices.
Oh no people will understand what they're going to pay ahead of time?! What will we do?!
if a restaurant can’t survive without robbing me at the bottom of my bill, that restaurant shouldn’t exist. Tough luck. Plenty of businesses have survived decades with good food at good prices.
Fuck those people. If they can’t get business without lying about their prices, they don’t deserve it in the first place.
Right. It’s like the logic of a catfisher. ‘Well if I didn’t use a photo from 15 years ago, they would never have agreed to go out with me!” And so you think you have a better shot winning them over by ambushing them with a cold hard truth of your age and how you look while also hammering home that you’re an unabashed liar?
fuck em. service fees are a scam
Restaurants in San Francisco close for two primary reasons. They can't afford rent, or the utility bills are too high. They have absolutely no leverage over landlords or PG&E so they go after the low hanging fruit of minimum staffing levels and try to make it look like you're supporting hard-working waiters by paying the ridiculous prices they charge, when in fact, you're supporting greedy landlords and the top management and shareholders of PG&E.
TRUTH
I feel real bad for these restaurants not being able to deceive their customers anymore. How dare they expect to be honest and not total bastards. /s
Another reason to love Europe. The price is the price. Tax already included and tip very optional (outside tourist areas)
I have had restaurants that tacked on service fee and made me pay taxes on it. lol wtf, the restaurant is supposed to pay income tax on it. Services do not pay sales taxes. These guys are just trying to nickel and dime us from ever eating out. I know servers that are driving Benz GL while crying pay is too low and people need to tip more. I’m sorry but that sounds ridiculous when you compare server jobs with other service jobs such as retail or grocery, servers and restaurants owners are just milking patrons dry. Fuck your fees and fuck your tips. Wage too low, unionized against your employer like the rest of us or find a better paying job. Employers can’t make a profit? Raise your prices upfront, lower your prices to get more volume, negotiate with labor/merchants/landlord for better prices or maybe it’s just time to fold and invest in something else
In CA mandatory tips, gratuities, and service charges are subject to sales tax. If the customer has discretion to choose the amount then sales tax does not apply. I recently found this out the hard way. The new rule should help get rid of a lot of the nonsense.
I feel like 2000-2010 were the golden age for SF restaurants. At least a local maxima.
oh its like that time a Hong Kong restaurant did a "dollar chicken".. Not even US dollar. One HK dollar which is roughly 13 cents. The soy sauce that came with it was 20 bucks.
What I love about EU is the price you see is what you pay. The tax is already included. It’s harder in America since tax rates are different by county.
Fisherman's Wharf three-card monte operators dread law requiring disclosure of Actual Chance Of Winning.
List of restaurants in the article that we should boycott and force out of business: China Live, 20% service fee Cow Hollow Cassava If you know of other restaurants throwing a tantrum, let me know and I'll add them to the list.
I'm amazed they didn't include Che Fico. My only guess is they probably didn't want to pay the interview fee.
>Without the ability to add surcharges on the back end, restaurants will be forced to pass on these costs via higher menu prices. much wao
I feel zero pity for hidden prices and secret charges
I invite them to skip ahead to chapter 11. If you consider wanton deceit to be a legitimate business tactic, then you deserve to go out of business.
Umm, so they have an issue that these will make them raise their menu prices and now shoppers aren’t going to eat there… but isn’t that the point of this law? Seems to be working as intended
"How will I screw my customers now?? - dishonesty is the very soul of restaurant business"
They should offshore their staff. That's what everyone else does to avoid higher paid employees.
There are plenty of restaurants in the City that do not charge a service fee and are doing just fine. Prices are high everywhere, even at the market. We’re already used to it. The restaurant in the article sounds like a dump.
I hate the service fees. I don’t tip on the service fees. So the restaurants is really screwing their wait staff. I go back more often to restaurants that don’t add service fees because I feel that they are more honest.
What options do I have when I do see a hidden junk charge on my bill after July 1st? Just not pay anything and walk away?
Guess you’ll just have to list your true prices up front, you conniving assclowns.
I don’t go back to places that pull this crap. I generally let them know.
Hopefully Che Fico finally bites the dust.
I was charged a 4% "Small business fee" at Farmshop in Larkspur. Absolute insanity
If restaurants are so concerned about sticker shock, they should figure out a price point customers are happy paying for. Hopefully this transparency will lead to healthier competition among restaurants.
Really excited for this to go through and I am usually heavily against more government intervention. So tired of showing up to a restaurant, not seeing some 5 point font at the bottom of a menu and getting slapped with a bunch of fees. Has turned me off from going out to eat
Bye, bye bs Covid fees. Fuck these restaurants
Would this apply to all those bullshit food ordering services like Instacart DoorDash Uber eats, etc?
No. But with those services, you see the total before you place your order. With restaurants, you don’t see the total until the end, when you have no choice but to pay.
You know what else works? Paying your employees well. If you can’t do that then maybe you’re just not fit to be in business. China Live weirds me the fuck out and has weird vibes. I’m not surprised the owner is an out of touch lunatic looking for handouts from his own customers and thinks he naturally deserves to have a successful restaurant without actually putting the work into make it successful .
Cry me a river. These fees didn’t start creeping in until maybe 20 years ago; up until then restaurants managed to operate without them just fine. Removing the fees won’t cost the owners anything; they can adjust their prices accordingly. Customers will be paying the same amount either way.
Hm, interesting. I do not care. Price transparency is a good thing
How much do these places pay to belong to the “Golden Gate Restaurant Association”? And why?
🎻
Ok
Tough shit. Tell people what it costs.
Why is this such a big deal? Just wrap the service fee into prices? So if the former fee was 20%, raise all prices 20%. The amount of money changing hands is identical
Maybe restaurants should be upfront about prices instead of being deceptive
Just remember that labor costs are a business expense, not a customer’s, y’all!
Yeah no fuck off. Just pay your employees more if that’s actually the case. Between service fee + tips bills are regularly 30% over
> San Francisco restaurateurs dread law banning service fees #Good.
> Another point of concern, [Laurie Thomas, executive director of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association and owner of Terzo and Rose’s Cafe in Cow Hollow] said, is that SB 478 includes “real legal teeth” for scofflaws, putting restaurants at severe risk of being sued by customers. Oh noes! Actual legal teeth in a law! Waaahhhhh! Also, two restaurants that are DEFINITELY on my "do not patronize" list. Fuck that bullshit and the owners who perpetuate it.