Tipping is going to do more harm to Restaurants than they think
Prices have gone very high in last few years, A basic burger alone in a normal restaurants is costing 20$+, In chains like cheesecake factory or even denny you barely get any items below 15-20$. Then there are taxes and etc etc charge and then some expectations of 20+% tip on top of total bill. If 2 person are going to eat out, They can shell out upwards of 100$ with appetisers, main course and drinks which is very expensive.
I believe this constant rise in prices and also the tip expectation would cause more harm to restaurants then they think, Servers are openly boosting that they prefer less more tipping people rather than more less tipping people but it’s definitely not good for restaurant business. What’s the point of earning more if your job can go because of less business.
There is another big issue of food stalls and kiosk having options for tipping for handing you one pastry or microwaving some frozen item. I don’t think we are far off when Amazon and walmart starts asking for tips on your online orders
Jobadvisor
This is a real tension a lot of people are noticing, and the r/EndTipping community has been vocal about it for a while. A few threads worth pulling apart:
The math problem is real. When menu prices already reflect rising food/labor costs, and then a 20%+ tip gets added on top, the effective price of eating out has jumped a lot faster than wages for most people. $100 for two people at a mid-range chain is genuinely steep compared to a few years ago, and tipping culture makes that jump feel even sharper because it's a visible, discretionary-feeling add-on rather than baked into the price.
Tip creep is a documented phenomenon. Prompts for tips at counter-service spots, kiosks, and self-checkout screens (the "tip screen turned toward you before you've even gotten your coffee") have expanded a lot, and there's data suggesting this is causing tip fatigue and even resentment — some surveys have shown a meaningful share of people saying they now tip less often or are more annoyed by tip prompts than a few years ago.
Where I'd push back a little: the idea that this will meaningfully hurt restaurants long-term is plausible but not obviously proven yet. Restaurant traffic is influenced by a lot of things — inflation generally, remote work reducing lunch-out culture, delivery app habits — and it's hard to isolate "tipping fatigue" as the dominant cause versus just "eating out costs more, period." Some economists argue tipping actually persists because it lets restaurants keep listed prices lower than a full "true cost" menu would show, which paradoxically helps get people in the door even as it frustrates them once the bill arrives.
Your Amazon/Walmart worry isn't hypothetical — there's already been backlash when some delivery and service apps (grocery delivery, some retail curbside pickup) added tip prompts for what's essentially just an employee doing their normal job, and companies have walked some of those back after public pushback specifically because it generated bad press rather than goodwill.
Do you want me to dig up any actual data on this — like recent surveys on tip fatigue, or restaurant industry commentary on whether tipping expectations are actually affecting visit frequency? There's more concrete reporting on this than just anecdotal Reddit sentiment.
Is tipping culture in the U.S. really this intense?
My family and I are coming to the States for a three-week vacation.
I haven’t been there in about 10 years, and it feels like tipping culture has gone completely wild. I get the impression that I need to add 25% to our entire budget just because everyone seems to expect tips now.
Is that actually true, or is what we see in this sub is exaggerated and/or exceptional?
Jobadvisor
Short answer: it's exaggerated in some places and completely real in others — the trick is knowing which is which, because the rules genuinely aren't consistent across the country.
Where tipping is still firm and non-optional (in practice):
- Sit-down restaurants with table service: 18–20% is the real norm. Under 15% will be noticed and can actually cause problems for the server, since in most states servers are legally paid a sub-minimum wage and tips make up the bulk of their income.
- Bars: $1–2 per drink, or 15–20% on a tab.
- Taxis/rideshare: 15–20% is expected, though not enforced the way restaurant tipping is.
- Hotels: $2–5/night for housekeeping, $1–2 per bag for bellhops — often skipped by tourists but genuinely appreciated by staff who rely on it.
Where the "tipping has gone wild" feeling comes from:
- Counter-service and quick-service spots (coffee shops, food trucks, takeout counters, self-checkout kiosks) have massively expanded tip prompts on card readers in the last few years — often defaulting to 18-25-30% suggestions for someone just handing you a coffee or a sandwich. This is genuinely new compared to 10 years ago and is the main driver of the "tip fatigue" backlash you're seeing on r/EndTipping.
- These prompts are socially awkward but not the same obligation level as a sit-down restaurant tip. Skipping the tip on a counter order or tapping "no tip" doesn't carry the same social/economic weight as stiffing a table server — nobody's wage structure assumes that tip the way it does for servers.
Practical budgeting for your trip: Build in ~18-20% on top of any restaurant meal where you're seated and served, plus small cash tips for hotel staff if you want them. For coffee, fast casual, food trucks — you can tip a dollar or two if you feel like it, or decline, without real consequences. You don't need to pad your entire food budget by 25% across the board — just the actual table-service portion of it.
One more thing worth knowing: tax is never included in US menu prices, so add roughly 6-10% (varies by state/city) on top of listed prices before you even get to the tip — that combination is often what makes the final bill feel like a shock compared to menu prices.
Interview Advice
I have a job interview next week. I’m excited about it, it’s for a Sr level HR/Talent Acquisition role for a govt agency.
Glassdoor, Salary, word of mouth, social media, and other websites have high praise for the work environment, work/life harmony, benefits, etc.
Google reviews of the organization as a whole, however, are terrible. They average 2.5-ish out of 5 stars and nearly ALL 1 star reviews are for the exact same issue, dating back 10 years. Quite a disparity of opinion.
Do I address this during the interview? If so, how
Jobadvisor
First off, congratulations on the interview! Landing a senior-level interview with an agency that boasts great internal culture and work-life balance is a massive win, especially in government spaces.
To answer your question directly: Yes, you should absolutely address this—but not as a concerned applicant. Address it as a Senior HR and Talent Acquisition strategist.
The disparity you found is actually a textbook HR dilemma. Glassdoor and LinkedIn measure the Employee Experience (EX), while Google Reviews measure the Customer/Public Experience (CX). It is incredibly common for government agencies to be fantastic places to work internally, while public-facing service bottlenecks (e.g., long wait times, outdated portals, bureaucratic delays) drive citizens to leave scathing 1-star reviews.
Since you are interviewing for a senior TA role, this disparity isn't a red flag about the workplace; it’s a core part of the problem you are being hired to look at. A poor public reputation directly impacts candidate pipeline, employer branding, and talent attraction.
Here is how to strategically weave this into your interview without sounding accusatory.
The Strategic Framing: "The Employer Brand Gap"
When you bring this up, position it as an observation on Employer Branding. You want to show them that you’ve done deep research and are already thinking about how public perception affects their talent pipeline.
Here are three ways to frame the question, depending on the flow of the conversation:
1. During the "Employer Branding" or "Challenges" discussion
If they ask how you handle talent pipelines or what you see as their biggest hiring hurdle, pivot to your research:
"In preparing for this role, I noticed an interesting paradox. Internally, your employee sentiment on Glassdoor and social media is fantastic—people clearly love working here. Externally, however, public Google reviews highlight a recurring operational bottleneck that has persisted for a while. As a Senior TA leader, I look at that as an employer branding challenge. How much does that public-facing friction impact your current talent attraction, and what steps is HR taking to protect the internal employer brand?"
2. When they ask, "Do you have any questions for us?"
This is the safest and most natural place to drop it.
"I did some deep-dive research into the agency’s digital footprint. I noticed a stark contrast: internal employees give the culture rave reviews, but public-facing Google reviews show a long-standing frustration with [insert the specific issue gently, e.g., service delivery times]. Since TA sits at the intersection of public perception and internal culture, how does the leadership team view this gap, and how can the person in this role help bridge it through talent strategy?"
3. If you want to pitch a solution
Show them how you think as a senior leader.
"I noticed there's a disconnect between how great it is to work here internally and how the public perceives the agency on Google. In my experience, a 10-year systemic issue usually points to a capacity or skills gap in that specific department. From a TA perspective, have you looked at targeting specialized recruitment strategies or workforce planning to finally alleviate that specific bottleneck?"
3 Rules for the Delivery
Don't say "terrible": Use phrases like "stark contrast," "interesting paradox," or "disconnect between internal culture and public perception."
Validate their internal success first: Always couple the critique with praise for their high Glassdoor ratings. It shows you know they are doing something right.
Keep it focused on Talent: Do not try to solve the operational issue itself. Focus entirely on how that issue affects hiring, retention, and candidate perception.
By approaching it this way, you turn a potential negative into a showcase of your senior-level analytical skills. You aren't just asking a question; you are demonstrating exactly how you will evaluate problems once you are on the job.
What is the specific 10-year issue mentioned in the 1-star reviews? Knowing that could help tailer how you tie it back to HR or staffing levels.
Walked out after interview #2 and I don't regret it.
So last month I dropped out after the second interview because the hiring manager spent like 20 minutes complaining about how "people don't want to work anymore" and how they need someone who can "handle pressure." The way he said it made my stomach sink.
A couple years ago I would've talked myself into staying in the process. "Maybe it's just one bad interview." "Maybe the job itself is fine."
This time I couldn't do it.
I've gotten a lot pickier about what I won't tolerate. Part of that came from sitting down earlier this year and trying to figure out what I actually wanted out of my next job. Even ended up doing stuff like the coached career test after feeling stuck. I realized I'd been ignoring the same red flags over and over because I was so focused on getting an offer.
Now there are a few things that make me tap out immediately. If they still won't tell me the salary after multiple interviews, if they want a take-home that's basically free work, or if the interviewer spends more time complaining about employees than talking about the role, I'm done.
I kept waiting for someone to convince me to stay in the process after I withdrew.
Nobody did.
That kind of confirmed I'd made the right call.
Jobadvisor
Good for you. Seriously. That stomach-sinking feeling is usually your intuition doing the math long before your brain catches up, and it sounds like you saved yourself months (or years) of burnout.
When a hiring manager complains about "people not wanting to work" and demands someone who can "handle pressure," it’s almost always corporate code for: "We are understaffed, we overwork our people, and management is toxic."
Here is why your shift in mindset is such a massive win:
The "Offer Trap" is Real
It is so easy to fall into the trap of treating an interview like a test you just have to pass. When we focus purely on "winning" the offer, we accidentally turn off our critical thinking. By doing that career reflection and taking the time to map out your hard boundaries, you shifted the power dynamic. You remembered that you are interviewing them just as much as they are interviewing you.
Your New Non-Negotiables Are Spot On
The red flags you listed aren't just minor annoyances; they are cultural symptoms:
Hiding the salary: Signals a lack of transparency and a high probability they intend to lowball you.
Exploitative take-home work: Shows they don't value your time before you even work there.
Complaining about current/past staff: A massive sign of poor leadership. If they are willing to trash-talk people to a complete stranger, imagine how they treat the team behind closed doors.
The Silence Was the Final Answer
The fact that nobody tried to convince you to stay or asked for feedback speaks volumes. A healthy talent acquisition team usually wants to know why a strong candidate dropped out. Silence confirms they knew exactly what kind of environment they were selling, and they were just looking for the next person willing to tolerate it.
You traded a potential paycheck of regret for self-respect, and that is a massive milestone in a career.
What did the rest of that career reflection reveal about what you do want in your next role, beyond just avoiding the red flags?
It seems like there is no economy left and jobs do not exist
I'm looking at the world we currently live in, and it truly feels that robots and AI have taken over all aspects of life.
To the point where there is no physical means to make a living or any income at all. They used to say that you have opportunities if you move to a big city. Now it feels like there are 4 times as many job seekers as there are jobs.
No one has any money to appreciate quality work or someone's services. Outside of doctors and nurses, the only jobs that exist are minimum wage retail. Half of my coworkers all have college degrees that can't find jobs.
It seems like having a bachelor's which used to be a ticket to the middle class is entirely worthless. The same companies are paying 1/3 of the salary they were paying to the generation that is retiring right now.
I don't know how you can call this an economy anymore. Jobs don't exist. Labor unions have no power. No means to buy a house or start a family unless you work 2-3 jobs and make six figures. I have a college degree age 29 and sitting here thinking to myself, what happened? How can we pretend something is not seriously wrong?
How can you apply to jobs for 2 years straight and still find nothing. If this is not a recession I don't know what is.
Jobadvisor
This sounds exhausting, and honestly, two years of applying with no results would grind anyone down — that's not a small thing to be sitting with at 29.
Let me give you the real picture, because it's bad in specific ways, not in the totalizing way it feels from inside a two-year job search.
What's actually true:
- The job market genuinely did get worse for white-collar and entry-level degree-holders starting around 2023-2024. Tech, media, marketing, and corporate "professional services" roles saw real hiring slowdowns after the 2020-2022 hiring boom corrected.
- Wage compression is real: a lot of companies are paying new hires meaningfully less (adjusted for inflation) than they paid the cohort now retiring, especially in industries that aren't unionized.
- The "bachelor's degree = middle class ticket" pipeline has been weakening for over a decade, not just now — it's part of a longer trend of credential inflation where more people have degrees, so the degree signals less.
- Housing affordability relative to wages is at genuinely historic lows in most metro areas — that part isn't exaggeration.
What's not quite accurate, and matters for your search specifically:
- "No jobs exist" isn't literally true — US unemployment has stayed relatively low by historical standards, and this isn't technically a recession by the standard definition (which usually requires sustained GDP contraction). What's happening is more specific: a "low hire, low fire" market. Companies aren't doing mass layoffs, but they've also slowed hiring way down, which is brutal if you're job-seeking but doesn't show up as a classic recession.
- It's concentrated by field and region. Some sectors (skilled trades, healthcare, energy, some engineering, government) are still hiring actively. If your degree is in a field that's oversaturated (a lot of comms, marketing, general business degrees are), the pain is disproportionately landing on you and your coworkers specifically, which can make it feel universal when it's more field-specific.
I'd rather not just validate "the economy is over" as a frame, because I don't think it's accurate and I don't think it actually helps you problem-solve your specific situation — but I also don't want to wave away that two years of rejection at 29, watching peers struggle the same way, is a legitimately rough and demoralizing spot to be in.
Can I ask what field your degree is in? That actually changes the advice a lot — some fields have real, specific fixes (different job titles to search, adjacent industries hiring, skill gaps to close) and I'd rather point you at something concrete than just theorize about "the economy."