The worst part of this though is DoorDash outright deceiving me by prominently saying 100% of the tip goes to Dashers every time I checkout. When I read that I assume it’s a bonus, not that DoorDash will then reduce their portion of the pay. Seeing that message, I’ve been religiously tipping via DoorDash, not any more. It’s only cash from here on.
This is the biggest part that is misleading and makes a good service a bit shady.
I tip well because I wanted my food to be handled well and the driver to get a nice payment out of it. I also want the driver to make sure the order is good and correct, I am willing to pay extra for that. Now DoorDash is telling me they decide that for me and the driver. I think they should do something to change that or at least remove that message.
I have also read on reddit in the subreddits for these services like /r/doordash/ that because they pay low for some routes, even if people tip well, that dashers double up on deliveries. Sometimes the service asks them to and knocks their acceptance rate if they don't, or offers really far deliveries for cheap. I wanted to tip enough so they weren't racing or doubling up.
It is fine if they have to do that where it makes sense, but I want to know so I can choose not to use the service then if the deliveries are far and food is will be affected, or allow customers to tip high enough that the driver does not need to double up.
DoorDash should have a service fee that allows you to choose level of delivery then, that you can choose single stop. If they are short on drivers, then increase prices, don't downgrade service.
DoorDash forces many drivers to double up, even if the tip is high and it harms them algorithmically on acceptance rate if they don't.
DoorDash just provides the logistics. The food quality, speedy delivery and customer should be the focus here. I feel like some of these policies take away from quality from customers and value from drivers.
If I am already paying higher costs for the food, a service fee, and a tip, which usually turns into 30-40% higher food costs, you'd think quality, customer desires and driver loyalty would matter.
These workers are vulnerable, at the margins of their economy and are already suffering at the hands of a nation-wide refusal to raise the minimum wage to something livable so they can exercise genuine financial independence.
Please do not take advantage of the situation to force your favorite poorly-regulated finance app de jour on them by only tipping with venmo or square cash. There are a bunch of good reasons not to do this, such as the fact that if you choose venmo it's now necessary for your delivery driver to own a relatively expensive smartphone with a monthly subscription in order to receive your tips, but mostly it's just kind of an arrogant and dickish thing to assume other people don't mind signing up for all the services you use to receive your $5 tip, so please consider just using cash. You'd probably be pissed if someone told you they only tipped in litecoin and you should go download breadwallet.
Check your assumptions?
So you change your model to be less base pay and more tips. In door dash’s case, their base pay is $1.
But now you have to worry about the person that stiffs the tip and leaves nothing. Can you feel comfortable paying the driver a dollar for that trip?
Well.. no. So you say you’ll guarantee a minimum per order. If anything the people in the room making this thought they were doing an extra nice thing by adding this guarantee.
The thing is, drivers asked for more of their pay to come from tipping. Most nonapp delivery drivers are paid on a heavy tipping model. If it was messaged drivers get $1 plus tips would people be ok with that?
I used to work in this industry but not these companies. Actual comp doesn’t change on much average through most of these schemes, though there are outliers. Which is to say, they’re all underpaid, even at the “better” ones, as is your dominoes driver.
I’m pretty sure that whatever DoorDash is doing is illegal in my state, and they are dodging enforcement by claiming the drivers are contractors. Screw them.
The claim that drivers are looking for more of their pay to come from tips seems false. Tips and pay are independent, and saying that drivers want to be paid less by the company seems false on its face.
A more accurate framing seems to be that the companies are using the presence of tips to lower the wage for the position to save money.
The issue is that variable base rates are directly using customer tips to fund wage obligations. If the company indicates they are giving 100% of a tip to the worker, but then offsets the pay by exactly that amount, they aren't actually giving that tip to the worker like they claimed.
So a fixed base rate plus protection against downside risk like you proposed is not the same as the variable base rate these companies are implementing.
The federal minimum wage for tipped jobs is $2.13/hour, with the employer only required to make up the difference if the employee doesn't break $7.25/hour in tips + wages.
In these situations, the tips received between the minimum tipped wage and the minimum wage work exactly like the DoorDash / Instacart wages: they are net zero for the employee.
Of course state and municipal minimum wages sometimes supersede these minimums, but they often have their own separate minimum wages for tipped jobs.
I'm not sure why people keep repeating this like they think it means something.
The tipped minimum wage is $2.13/hour (higher in most states), significantly lower than the regular minimum wage, because tipped workers almost always made more than federal minimum wage when tips were included. To repeat, for emphasis: the federal tipped minimum wage for employees is only $2.13/hour.
In the rare event that a tipped worker doesn't make at least federal minimum wage including tips, the employer is required to make up the difference, but this backstop was added to the law much later. It is the exception, not the rule, and it is wholly inappropriate to treat it like the standard case.
EDIT: This is different from what Amazon and DoorDash do, since they claim the fee they pay the driver is $X, under the general legal definition of "tip", any tip paid should be on top of the $X. They can look forward to class actions and DoL investigations in their near future since "tip" has an actual legal meaning for labor law purposes that you can't redefine in a ToS.
In both this case and the Amazon/DoorDash case, there is some concept of 'guaranteed wage' which is actually backfilled by tips.
DoorDash says, you are paid 0$, but get to keep 100% of the tips. And it says, if you are tipped less then 10$, they'll pay out the difference so you are guaranteed to make a minimum of 10$ per job, with the max uncapped, left to your tip potential.
This seems identical to me. Waiters are paid (2.13$ per hour + tip) or 7.95$ per hour if it adds up to less then that. Drivers are paid (0$ per job + tip) or 10$ per job if it adds up to less then that.
My understanding is that they have some guaranteed amount that the driver will get, and DoorDash/Amazon will then pay the difference of the guaranteed amount and the tip. There is no ceiling - the driver always keeps all of the tip, but the delivery fee will modulate down to some minimum.
Think of it as: you get to keep 100% of the tip, but they don't pay you anything extra, unless the tip is less then 10$, then they pay you the difference up to 10$.
You're using the wrong "this." Waitstaff don't have their tip-wage adjusted based on tips.
I was responding to this:
> No, increasing tips in the jar increases their pay proportionally.
For the tips that make up the margin between the tipped minimum wage and the standard minimum wage, their pay does not increase proportionally.
Some countries don't do it at all (e.g., Japan), and in a lot of countries people tip only in a few cases — exceptional service that went above and beyond, or rounding up the bill in a restaurant after a good meal. For foreigners the practice of tipping to ensure an employee gets at least a living wage in the US is quite strange.
Tipping is deeply cultural, you will be fighting against a phenomenon that is as American as apple pie (metaphorically speaking, it is Dutch in origin of course). Good luck in these days of ongoing identity wars.
Do you know of any good ideas to actually make that shift away from tipping happen?
That’s the best argument for why regulation needs to exist that I’ve heard in a while. When the only way the public, and the employees can effect change is through the massed goodwill of the minority of beneficiaries of the status quo, it’s time to step in and regulate.
Danny Meyer, a very prominent restauranteur in the US eliminated tipping in favor of a "hospitality included" model. That was in 2015. It has endured since. His restaurants are among some of the best in NYC. He's stated repeatedly that customers are quite happy with it. See:
Change the law to make tipping a private transaction between the customer and the direct recipient, with no ability for an employer to be able to view or dip into it. Taxing it is no issue, but that should again be a private matter between wait staff and the IRS.
If a customer wants the kitchen staff (or others) to receive a tip, then this must explicitly and freely be stated. The default should be that the direct recipient of the tip pockets the money. Leaving cash on the table should by law imply that the customer is leaving the money for the private benefit of the staff who directly waited on that table only.
Minimum wage topups using tips, and similar, would then be (intentionally) impossible. Employers would have to pay minimum wage (in places where one is defined).
Tipping would remain, but at least things wouldn't be quite as extreme as they are today.
Of course this will never happen because restaurant owners have more political sway than wait staff.
I know in some restaurant workplaces tips are pooled and shared among staff, and this doesn't seem unreasonable as everybody knows what they are getting into.
I leave 20% routine at a restaurant when I am waited on, but mostly zero at a counter style place. To me, the latter is purchase based rather than service based, and I don't tip at retail stores either.
If your tipping (or not) is in line with the legitimate expectation of the workers, then you're not stiffing them .
Which is why the discussion regarding tipping for online services is so important - this is when norms are being defined. The point of online commerce is that entire transaction is mediated by software, not that it simply sets up an open-ended appointment. For example we don't tip package delivery, even though they're damn hard workers (although I've certainly met them at the truck for heavy shit).
What has happened here is that these companies have added tip boxes to the transaction flow because it's a form of price discrimination (based on guilt) and they're hoping to lower their own costs, either because tips will make up for offering lower wages, or as we've seen here because it allows them to put their hand into the till directly.
The sensible thing to do is to mechanically put zero in any online tip box, because that box itself is an anti-feature. I hope that you then refrain from giving a cash tip, so that the expectations for online transactions remain simpler. I don't think we're at the place where these employees are reliant on tips (and these companies' practices seem to indicate so as well!), and if we're lucky it can remain that these companies have to fully compensate their workers rather than being able to stiff them and pass on the guilt.
 Of course there's still the systematic inflation-treadmill race to the bottom based stiffing, but you personally are not.
I can absolutely decide to not tip without businesses 'ending that practice en-masse'. You can too! In fact, anyone can!
Restaurants that incorporate the service fee into prices sell less food and particularly booze, leaving them with less money to pay the staff, leading to lower wages for front of house.
Given this experience, tipped workers are generally against any legislation that might change the system.
But also I know bartenders at a decent tipping bar (any with a good weekend business) make a lot more than $15-20 minimum wage.
Worked as a bouncer at one of the best bars in STL for tipping (high end late hours) and they'd make 95k+. Wasn't a job you could keep much past 40 unless you just didn't drink tho.
As an aside Was one of my better non co-op college gigs, I worked security and valet, so I made 100-200$ tips a night and 10/hr (1995) as a valet bouncer and it was a 12 hour shift (4pm-4am).
I'm fine with the way Tom does it. Just wish it would as mor consistent
As someone who tends to tip well, I really don’t mind it. It’s a way to tangibly say “thank you” and “I appreciated your work.” (That said, tips should be above and beyond. Not required, and not included in minimum wages.)
You’ll typically tip out the whole wait staff on an even basis, or the front waiter may keep a little more. Then you give something to the busser, but not an even share, and you probably also give something to the expediter, if there is one - the person who manages the window to the kitchen.
It would be fairly uncommon to pass on tips to the kitchen.
Also note, with a staff like this, you can serve more tables in an hour, maybe 6-7, so there’s more money to go around.
How can they possibly justify the bit about dashers receiving 100% of tips which is repeated several times?
Amazing how every sentence here is accurate and sounds positive yet it describes a scheme where tips are used for the base pay.
1. Suppose DoorDash provides a minimum payout of $0.01 instead of whatever algorithm they use. Then, clearly, 100% of your tip goes to the dasher.
2. Suppose you tip the dasher $1000 under the current system. The dasher receives $1001 and 100% of your tip feels like it's going to the driver.
3. Suppose dashers are paid a minimum of $100 per order, and your tip never reaches that level. In this case it feels like 0% of your tip is going to the dasher.
We actually don't have enough numbers to know which of these is more like reality as far as I know. If the typical tip is much larger than the minimum, then the minimum feels like it’s just protecting the dasher and their compensation is just tips. If it’s calculated to be right at the level of a typical tip or larger than it is clearly manipulative.
Encouraging customers to tip and suggesting 100% goes to the deliverer is fraud.
Pay the workers what they deserve and charge the customers what you need to.
This ridiculous game where the more generous people subsidize the rest of the customers out of guilt is absurd.
That’s obviously lame, since you’d have to basically tip over the minimum to see the pay change. But they lying when they say “100%”.
I got a package delivered by Amazon. It was "left in a secure location" according to the Amazon delivery driver. Turns out it was delivered at 9 pm, left outside my condo building in a February winter storm.
I can't complain about it (short of the item review) and Amazon doesn't learn that their driver sucks.
But hey, it's better for Amazon's bottom line, and divorce attorneys aren't free, ya know.
In reality, what appears to be happening is Uber is a massive scheme to siphon off vehicle depreciation for an enormous number of drivers that are hard up for cash.
The VCs aren't the only ones subsidizing cheap rides. The drivers are taking the brunt of it.
Then again, between the fulfillment center conditions, stealing tips from drivers, the over the top IP restrictions ("we own everything our employees do"), or the way it yanked around all those cities for HQ2... I suppose if folks valued worker conditions they'd probably already being untangling themselves from Amazon.
Doordash, like most food delivery services, takes much more of a cut out of the delivery experience than the value they provide. These apps are glorified CRUD apps with little differentiating them. If anything goes wrong it often is a nightmare, and I’ve never had an experience where one of these apps has correctly detected and fixed an issue with a delivery—each time I have to identify then fight their dark patterns to get a human to help me.
Uber categorically improved taxi service for consumers at the very least. These food delivery apps have honestly made the experience worse for consumers and for drivers.
Apparently the "tech" world has the definition of "innovation" mixed up with the one for "deception". How disruptive!
Prime now tips https://imgur.com/gallery/mGeZmm1
Do drivers see that they aren't being tipped before they drop off packages?
Don’t give Bezos ideas!
That is a very scummy behavior.
There might even be 2 cases...one for buyers, one for drivers.
A good portion of the US economy is based on paying workers less because they receive tips. And even the tax system has evolved to guess the tips for workers so that they don't just pocket the money without tax.
There's already one filed on Instacart for similar practices: https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/05/instacart-faces-class-acti...
And Instacart backed off the policy as a result: https://www.eater.com/2019/2/6/18214354/instacart-delivery-w...
In any case, you don't have to take a class action all the way to court to inflict damage.
Now I'm curious. Are you a lawyer, and is this legal advice?
If I'm reading this correctly, Instacart's pricing algorithm didn't even set a "minimum tipped wage" (i.e. say $1/job), which agree does not make sense, but having a "minimum tipped wage" per job and then another guarantee above that including tips is, again, not new.
If we want to review, as a society, whether customers should be subsidizing wages for service jobs, then that should be a much larger conversation to be had.
It provides an easy way to tip delivery drivers working for Amazon and the like.
Because the existing system seems like third world style corruption, frankly.
Ah here it is: https://help.uber.com/partners/article/are-tips-included-in-...