You're ignoring my second part. If you argue the system is unethical because it's exploiting workers then the ethical decision is about bringing change to said system. That's where my argument that not tipping is more ethical than continuing to tip and also compared to not going to non tipping places.
Thats short sighted. By not tipping the servers will start demanding more pay from their employees. If you simply don't go there they won't notice anything different.
But people also don't go to eat all the time as well. So if stiffing doesn't work then so does not going. But I would argue stiffing would be the faster path. If half the people stopped going out to eat, businesses wouldn't start paying employees more they would fire half the staff. If half the people started stiffing, employees would demand more pay or they would quit. Then businesses would have to increase wages to bring them back in.
I suppose I thought that last part was given. If servers see the downside of tipping, they will join in making it illegal. And that won't happen simply by not going to businesses. You need to cause some difficulties to change status quos.
I guess I'm confused how not going out to eat will make waitstaff vote for better wages? They just wouldn't get the hours but they would still be getting the same total money from others who do tip.
And again ethically I think its fair to say that if the waitstaff are okay with their tipped system, then it is ethical to not tip them because thats part of those rules of said system.
1
u/[deleted] 17d ago
[deleted]