Our waiter 'hated'us

[onthelake]

On a recent cruise, our family of three asked for a table just for us. We were assigned a table for 10 with 7 of the seats 'blocked' for our 18 day cruise. Of course we were fully aware of the tipping amounts but we were not aware that tips are not pooled. We now realize that the waiter was upset that he was missing out on $$$ from 7 potential passengers for a long cruise. Overall, it was a situation we did not create and we did not realize the impact on the server until we returned. Now I feel that pooling tips, at least for wait staff is a more correct way to run the diningroom.

[pcur]

On a recent cruise, our family of three asked for a table just for us. We were assigned a table for 10 with 7 of the seats 'blocked' for our 18 day cruise. Of course we were fully aware of the tipping amounts but we were not aware that tips are not pooled. We now realize that the waiter was upset that he was missing out on $$$ from 7 potential passengers for a long cruise. Overall, it was a situation we did not create and we did not realize the impact on the server until we returned. Now I feel that pooling tips, at least for wait staff is a more correct way to run the diningroom.

 

The wait staff is rewarded for their INDIVIDUAL performance, so pooling tips could (and probably would) diminish the service.

 

We have been in this situation before when we have been placed at a table for 4 with just the two of us. I usually acknowledge this to our waiter, so he/she is aware that I'm aware that they are losing tips. This way they know that we will most likely be adding extra to the tips to make up for the loss, but it's not a given. Of course, making up for 7 people would be really expensive, but some extra is a nice gesture, IMO.

 

The wait staff alternate to the Windjammer where they are tipped very little, and tips are pooled. So, one week at lower tips is understandable, and they have it happen all the time.

[TPKeller]

I think I would have picked a light moment to point out to the waiter, "It's a good thing we're here, or you'd not have anyone at all!

 

:)

 

Half-empty, half-full...

 

Theron

[LBumb]

exactly

[eldolko]

Since the topic says your waiter "hated" you - did he show it in any way or did you receive the service you could expect?

 

About pooling the tip I think it may have impact on the service level.

Less skilled waiters may feel they have no reason to improve since they get a fair tip anyway.

More skilled waiters may lower their performance, knowing the tip will be shared with all his fellow waiters.

 

With a personal tip the personal performance and behavior of a waiter has direct impact on the tip he receives. Better service = happier guests = more money in the pocket.

 

But that's just my opinion.

[Tim,n,Sue]

Or you could have been seated at another table not assigned to him/her. In that case they would have also missed out on your tips. I have seen completely empty large tables for entire cruises a number of times.

[kijjy]

On a recent cruise, our family of three asked for a table just for us. We were assigned a table for 10 with 7 of the seats 'blocked' for our 18 day cruise. Of course we were fully aware of the tipping amounts but we were not aware that tips are not pooled. We now realize that the waiter was upset that he was missing out on $$$ from 7 potential passengers for a long cruise. Overall, it was a situation we did not create and we did not realize the impact on the server until we returned. Now I feel that pooling tips, at least for wait staff is a more correct way to run the diningroom.

 

 

I would never have done that, especially for EIGHTEEN days. And yes, it was a situation you created... you asked for a table for 3 and they tried (and succeeded) to accomodate you... when you saw HOW they had to go about accomodating you, you didn't tell him to open up the table so he could make his tips. How is this not a situation you created?

[pcur]

I think I would have picked a light moment to point out to the waiter, "It's a good thing we're here, or you'd not have anyone at all!

 

:)

 

Half-empty, half-full...

 

Theron

 

Good point, Theron. Yes, the table would not have been occupied anyway, since it was available to the OP to begin with. But, if there was a large party asking for another table, then the OPs would not have been considered.

 

I agree a chat with the waiter would have been a good way to get things back on track, plus some extra in the tip envelope at the end.

 

We just feel strongly about this, so it's just our way of doing things. We sat at another table for a night or two with some new acquaintances on one cruise. Not only did we give our assigned staff full tips, but we made a trip over to the other table on the last night and gave the waiter/assistant waiter tips for the two nights we were with them. It seemed the fair thing to do.

[cherylandtk]

The real blame here lies with the Head Waiter/Maitre'd who should have found a different solution to seating three people. Put them at a four-top or put a different top on a two-top and seat the three there, leaving the large table to be assigned to other diners. Large tables are usually in high demand, to block out a 10 person table was unnecessary. The waiter knew this, too.

[jbond]

Half-empty, half-full...

It's not a question of half-empty or half-full. Just like the glass, the table was too big. That was not the fault of the OP and they shouldn't feel guilty.

[misty57]

I would never have done that, especially for EIGHTEEN days. And yes, it was a situation you created... you asked for a table for 3 and they tried (and succeeded) to accomodate you... when you saw HOW they had to go about accomodating you, you didn't tell him to open up the table so he could make his tips. How is this not a situation you created?

 

I don't think that the paying customer is responsible for making sure the wait staff get tips from people who "might' have been seated at the table. If it wasn't his table, it would have been someone else. You don't know how many tables he was serving. It may have been enough to average out, and then there is always the other seating. I personally wouldn't feel responsible. It is the responsibility of whoever makes those assignments. I always tip the recommended amount and sometimes more, but as my DH is fond of saying, " I didn't take them to raise".

[yogimax]

 

The wait staff alternate to the Windjammer where they are tipped very little, and tips are pooled. So, one week at lower tips is understandable, and they have it happen all the time.

 

I'm not sure this is quite accurate. Your basic waiter and assistant waiter will be in the MDR each evening. They will also serve in the Windjammer for breakfast or lunch. This is true for the vast majority of waiters.

 

I'm not sure who serves in the Windjammer for dinner but it is far fewer than in the MDR. My understanding is that the waiters in the MDR are there for every cruise.

[grand isle joe]

As stated before you should not feel guilty. There seems to be not enough passengers to fill the dining room in the first place for if there were you would have never sat at such a large table in the first place. And it is the M.D. that makes up the seating plan anyway.Maybe your waiter just was having a bad week. Who knows but I hope you had a great cruise anyway.:)

[onthelake]

The waiter told us nightly how tips were an 'obligation', etc. It was very uncomfortable - and we cruise often but not on RCL so we did not know tips were not pooled. We considered asking for a different table but that seemed to have inherent problems - as in no small tables open so a probable replay of the situation we were in. and, of course, we had no idea that by requesting a table for the three of us, we would find ourselves the only ones at such a large table.

[pcur]

I'm not sure this is quite accurate. Your basic waiter and assistant waiter will be in the MDR each evening. They will also serve in the Windjammer for breakfast or lunch. This is true for the vast majority of waiters.

 

I'm not sure who serves in the Windjammer for dinner but it is far fewer than in the MDR. My understanding is that the waiters in the MDR are there for every cruise.

 

My understanding is they are assigned to the Windjammer in the evening for some cruises. We saw this several times on b2b cruises.

 

My point was that the wait staff have good weeks and bad weeks where tipping is concerned, and they have to deal with this all the time.

 

I agree somewhat with kijjy: the OP requested this table arrangement, and so is partially responsible for the results. However, it was rude of the waiter to mention the tips nightly. A discussion with the head waiter would have helped, since he/she could have scouted for a smaller table. But, my guess is the table would have been completely empty if the OP had moved; hence the "half full" analogy is accurate, IMO.

[Langley Cruisers]

...the OP requested this table arrangement, and so is partially responsible for the results.....

 

Sorry, how is OP in any way responsible for the size of the table to which they were assigned?

.

[kijjy]

However, it was rude of the waiter to mention the tips nightly.

 

I agree completely with this. I keep hearing more and more and more about waiters going on and on about the tips. That is rude and unprofessional, IMO.... you don't go to Ruby Tuesday and have your server say to you "oh by the way, don't forget to tip me and the going rate is 18 to 20 percent".... if that was ever said to me in a restaurant, you can bet your hiney i'd be talking to his/her manager.

[pcur]

Sorry, how is OP in any way responsible for the size of the table to which they were assigned?

.

 

Their partial responsibility is to try to make the situation better for themselves and the waiter when they ended up in an unpleasant situation. I didn't say they were responsible for the size of their table assigned: you just assumed that's what I meant.

 

I think they did try to do so, since the OP mentioned they tried to change tables again.

[Langley Cruisers]

Their partial responsibility is to try to make the situation better for themselves and the waiter when they ended up in an unpleasant situation. I didn't say they were responsible for the size of their table assigned: you just assumed that's what I meant...

 

OK.... understand what you meant with your first sentence, did not need the sarcasm on your second sentence. :(

[DonnaK]

I don't see it that way...this is where you were assigned, and you are not responsible for whether or not the rest of your table is full.

 

Our party of 4 was assigned a table for 8 right next to the captain's table. The other 4 people didn't show up for the entire length of the cruise. About midway through, we asked the head waiter, and he said that the other people who were originially assigned there switched to MTD. So, I asked why the table wasn't changed to a four-top, and we were told that they still keep it as an 8-top and set it for 8 people because the other seating has all 8 people there. So we had to sit in a semi-circle around this giant table throughout the cruise, but never once felt responsible that the waiter wasn't getting tips from the empty places.

[DEL67]

A few years ago, for some reason my husband and I were assigned to a table for 10 by ourselves for a 12 day repositioning cruise. We were not happy about it, but our waiter gave us fabulous service and even stopped other waiters from taking extra silverware from our table while we were stting there.

[pcur]

OK.... understand what you meant with your first sentence, did not need the sarcasm on your second sentence. :(

 

I wasn't being sarcastic! I was just explaining myself.:confused::confused:

[Shammy1]

Don't they have tables for 2. I thought I have seen them on RC cruises.

[PH8]

Don't they have tables for 2. I thought I have seen them on RC cruises.

Yes,they do,but that wouldn't had helped the OP and their party of 3..

[jbond]

the OP requested this table arrangement, and so is partially responsible for the results.

Their partial responsibility is to try to make the situation better for themselves and the waiter when they ended up in an unpleasant situation. I didn't say they were responsible for the size of their table assigned: you just assumed that's what I meant.

You stated quite clearly that the OP requested this table arrangement, and so is partially responsible for the results. I'm sure the OP didn't request that particular table arrangement, I would have assumed they requested a table for three, not 10. They are in no way responsible for the oversize table, that's the responsibility of the maître d'. You then switch their responsibility to have them make the situation better for them and the waiter, when the cause of the unpleasant situation was the waiter's poor attitude. They could have reported it to the maître d', but with no other tables available, it could have made the situation worse. The waiter is the bad guy, not the OP.