It is said that hospitality is not just about serving food to customers but also serving souls. However, if the customer starts displaying utterly rude behavior, they have to be put in their place. In August 2023, a Reddit user shared a story about their friend who encountered a customer like that in r/pettyrevenge. The man presented the server with a $100 tip that they discovered later, was fake. They were furious but they did something that left the customer dumb-mouthed. They were lauded by people for how they handled the situation.

Representative Image Source: Pexels | Olly
Representative Image Source: Pexels | Olly

The server in question received an irate customer one day. The man was one of the regular customers, usually remained quiet, and didn’t tip well. Most of the time, he visited the restaurant with his friends or by himself, where he would sit in the bar and watch a sports game. “I’ve never had a problem with him until he came in one time with a date,” the server wrote.

Representative Image Source: Pexels | Pixabay
Representative Image Source: Pexels | Pixabay

That specific day, a woman was accompanying the man. The server had never seen the woman before so they assumed the man was on a date. After their meal, the couple called the server and asked them for the check. They went right around the corner from the table to get it.

Representative Image Source: Pexels | Cottonbro
Representative Image Source: Pexels | Cottonbro

As they were returning to the table, they noticed that the man was placing a $100 bill on the table. “The guy says to the woman, ‘Watch this’ as he puts down a hundred dollar bill on the table. He saw me see and he was joking like, ‘Oh! you weren’t supposed to see that’,” they wrote. He was probably trying to impress the woman, the server thought. But they didn’t care about it as they needed money at that time and their focus was on the $100 tip.

Representative Image Source: Pexels | Cottonbro
Representative Image Source: Pexels | Cottonbro

To their shock, they discovered that the $100 note was fake. “That means this freaking guy planned this out to impress this woman. It was so frustrating because I needed the money but at the same time I thought it was because I did a great job,” the waiter said. They narrated the entire incident to her manager who thought it was “ridiculous.”

via GIPHY

Two weeks later, the obnoxious man visited the restaurant again with the same woman. This time, the server was working on different tables and was quite busy. But when their manager asked if they wanted to take the order for the couple’s table and teach the man a lesson, they said yes. It was their chance to settle the score with the man. They walked to their table, with the fake $100 note in their pocket, waiting for the right moment to act. “I get to their table and they instantly recognize me, the woman seemed normal but the guy looked like he was nervous. I pretended nothing happened all the way until I got their check,” the server described.

via GIPHY

When they brought the check, they placed it down on the table along with the fake $100 bill, saying, “Hey, not sure if you remember me from last time but I believe you forgot this, just returning it because I believed it was too much.” Apparently, their trick worked. The woman on the table looked confused as if she had spotted the man’s deception. The server walked away. When they returned, they found a big $0.00 from the man as their tip on the signed copy. But on a positive note, the woman who was also sitting at the same table and saw the whole charade of her date, left a $50 tip for the server.

Representative Image Source: Pexels | Karolina Grabowska
Representative Image Source: Pexels | Karolina Grabowska

“One can only assume that the guy didn’t want to tip on his card so he wrote obnoxiously big zeros on the tip and that $50 just happened to be where the woman was sitting, so I’m hoping she had placed it there,” the server reflected, adding that they hoped the woman eventually saw the red flags that the man showed.

Representative Image Source: Pexels | Jonathan Borba
Representative Image Source: Pexels | Jonathan Borba

The server’s story was upvoted by 15,000 people and over 730 left comments on it. u/tricularia commented, “My dad always told me that if you want to know how someone will act in a long-term relationship, pay attention to how they treat servers in restaurants. And since I started paying attention, I am definitely noticing a pattern there.”

Image Source: Reddit | u/eloagent
Image Source: Reddit | u/eloagent

u/Its_only__forever shared their own similar experience, “As someone that has been in the industry for over 2 decades, I love this. I had a party once that tipped me in pennies spread across the table when they left. I scooped that s**t up so fast and chased them out and just dumped it at their feet with an ‘I think you forgot something.’ Yes, I got in trouble. Yes, it was worth it.”

Image Source: Reddit | u/spoomplesplz
Image Source: Reddit | u/spoomplesplz

Many said the woman needed to know that the man was a liar. “This is fabulous! I hope the lady dumped him because you showed her what kind of jerk he was,” said u/assignmentfit461. u/thekeekses added, “As a woman who was raised by a single mother who was a server for many many years, I ended a relationship with a guy because he didn’t tip.”

Image Source: Reddit | u/mulderitsme99
Image Source: Reddit | u/mulderitsme99

u/Careless_Candle6771 shared from her personal experience. “The place I work at is a hot spot for 1st dates and any time I cash a couple out, I ask them if they want their receipt. The dude usually says no as the merchant copy is being printed and then I can see the $0 tip and I go, “ok!” And then just leave it face up on the table anyway. My god, do I love when the women run back with cash saying, “Oh, my god I’m so sorry!”

via GIPHY

This article originally appeared last year.

  • She tipped a dollar on a $5 coffee and the barista called her out in front of the whole café. The internet couldn’t agree on who was wrong.
    Barista hands customer their coffeePhoto credit: Canva
    ,

    She tipped a dollar on a $5 coffee and the barista called her out in front of the whole café. The internet couldn’t agree on who was wrong.

    The incident touched a nerve because almost everyone has stood at a tip screen lately wondering what they actually owe.

    A regular customer at her local coffee shop dropped a dollar in the tip jar on her way out last week and ended up sparking a debate that a lot of people clearly needed to have.

    She’d paid $5 for her coffee, skipped the card tip prompt at checkout, and left a bill in the jar on her way out the door. The barista noticed, glanced at the cash in her customer’s wallet, and said loudly enough for the room to hear: “Oh wow! A whole dollar… that’s SO generous! Thank you SO much.”

    The customer, who goes by u/moonchildcountrygirl on Reddit, said she was rattled enough to wonder whether something was going to end up in her drink. When she posted about it online, Newsweek picked up the story and more than 800 comments followed.

    Reddit’s reaction was not especially sympathetic to the barista. “Should have picked that dollar back,” was among the most upvoted responses. Others said they would have asked for a full refund on the drink. The OP herself landed on a version of that position: if a tip is going to be met with sarcasm, why tip at all?

    But the incident is a little more complicated than a straightforward etiquette violation, because the math here actually favors the customer. A dollar on a $5 drink is a 20% tip, the same percentage most people consider the standard for a sit-down restaurant with table service. Industry veterans generally say a dollar a drink is a reasonable coffee shop tip, and that baristas at most cafés (unlike servers) are paid standard minimum wage rather than the lower tipped-employee rate that makes gratuities more essential.

    A barista serves a customer in a coffee shop
    A barista serves a customer. Photo credit: Canva

    None of which makes a public sarcastic remark the right response. But it does situate the incident inside a broader frustration that’s been building for a few years. A Pew Research Center survey found that 7 in 10 American adults say tipping is now expected in more places than it was a few years ago. A Bankrate survey found that 41% of Americans think tipping culture has gotten out of hand, and around 63% have at least one negative view about tipping overall. More than 60% agreed that employers should simply pay workers better so tips don’t have to fill the gap.

    The tip jar and the checkout screen have become the place where all of that tension gets concentrated into a single uncomfortable moment. The barista’s comment was out of line. The customer’s dollar was not stingy. And the fact that it’s hard to say either of those things without someone disagreeing is probably the actual story.

    This article originally appeared earlier this year.

  • Denmark’s generous parental leave policies erase eighty percent of the ‘motherhood penalty’
    A Danish mom drops her young son at his school in Copenhagen.Photo credit: Sergei Gapon/AFP via Getty Images
    , , ,

    Denmark’s generous parental leave policies erase eighty percent of the ‘motherhood penalty’

    Paid leave and universal child care help moms stay attached to work, even as reduced hours trim pay.

    For many women in the U.S. and around the world, motherhood comes with career costs.

    Raising children tends to lead to lower wages and fewer work hours for mothers – but not fathers – in the United States and around the world.

    As a sociologist, I study how family relationships can shape your economic circumstances. In the past, I’ve studied how motherhood tends to depress women’s wages, something social scientists call the “motherhood penalty.”

    I wondered: Can government programs that provide financial support to parents offset the motherhood penalty in earnings?

    A ‘motherhood penalty’

    I set out with Therese Christensen, a Danish sociologist, to answer this question for moms in Denmark – a Scandinavian country with one of the world’s strongest safety nets.

    Several Danish policies are intended to help mothers stay employed.

    For example, subsidized child care is available for all children from 6 months of age until they can attend elementary school. Parents pay no more than 25% of its cost.

    But even Danish moms see their earnings fall precipitously, partly because they work fewer hours.

    Losing $9,000 in the first year

    In an article to be published in an upcoming issue of European Sociological Review, Christensen and I showed that mothers’ increased income from the state – such as from child benefits and paid parental leave – offset about 80% of Danish moms’ average earnings losses.

    Using administrative data from Statistics Denmark, a government agency that collects and compiles national statistics, we studied the long-term effects of motherhood on income for 104,361 Danish women. They were born in the early 1960s and became mothers for the first time when they were 20-35 years old.

    They all became mothers by 2000, making it possible to observe how their earnings unfolded for decades after their first child was born. While the Danish government’s policies changed over those years, paid parental leave and child allowances and other benefits were in place throughout. The women were, on average, age 26 when they became mothers for the first time, and 85% had more than one child.

    We estimated that motherhood led to a loss of about the equivalent of US$9,000 in women’s earnings – which we measured in inflation-adjusted 2022 U.S. dollars – in the year they gave birth to or adopted their first child, compared with what we would expect if they had remained childless. While the motherhood penalty got smaller as their children got older, it was long-lasting.

    The penalty only fully disappeared 19 years after the women became moms. Motherhood also led to a long-term decrease in the number of the hours they worked.

    Motherhood, Safety net, Income inequality, Denmark, Gender inequality, Scandinavia, Government benefits, Mothers Day, Mother's Day, motherhood penalty
    The u2018motherhood penaltyu2019 is largest in the first year after a momu2019s first birth or adoption. Kristian Tuxen Ladegaard Berg/NurPhoto via Getty Images

    Studying whether government can fix it

    These annual penalties add up.

    We estimated that motherhood cost the average Danish woman a total of about $120,000 in earnings over the first 20 years after they first had children – about 12% of the money they would have earned over those two decades had they remained childless.

    Most of the mothers in our study who were employed before giving birth were eligible for four weeks of paid leave before giving birth and 24 weeks afterward. They could share up to 10 weeks of their paid leave with the baby’s father. The length and size of this benefit has changed over the years.

    The Danish government also offers child benefits – payments made to parents of children under 18. These benefits are sometimes called a “child allowance.”

    Denmark has other policies, like housing allowances, that are available to all Danes, but are more generous for parents with children living at home.

    Using the same data, Christensen and I next estimated how motherhood affects how much money Danish moms receive from the government. We wanted to know whether they get enough income from the government to compensate for their loss of income from their paid work.

    Motherhood, Safety net, Income inequality, Denmark, Gender inequality, Scandinavia, Government benefits, Mothers Day, Mother's Day, motherhood penalty

    We found that motherhood leads to immediate increases in Danish moms’ government benefits. In the year they first gave birth to or adopted a child, women received over $7,000 more from the government than if they had remained childless. That money didn’t fully offset their lost earnings, but it made a substantial dent.

    The gap between the money that mothers received from the government, compared with what they would have received if they remained childless, faded in the years following their first birth or adoption. But we detected a long-term bump in income from government benefits for mothers – even 20 years after they first become mothers.

    Cumulatively, we determined that the Danish government offset about 80% of the motherhood earnings penalty for the women we studied. While mothers lost about $120,000 in earnings compared with childless women over the two decades after becoming a mother, they gained about $100,000 in government benefits, so their total income loss was only about $20,000.

    Benefits for parents of older kids

    Our findings show that government benefits do not fully offset earnings losses for Danish moms. But they help a lot.

    Because most countries provide less generous parental benefits, Denmark is not a representative case. It is instead a test case that shows what’s possible when governments make financially supporting parents a high priority.

    That is, strong financial support for mothers from the government can make motherhood more affordable and promote gender equality in economic resources.

    Because the motherhood penalty is largest at the beginning, government benefits targeted to moms with infants, such as paid parental leave, may be especially valuable.

    Child care subsidies can also help mothers return to work faster.

    The motherhood penalty’s long-term nature, however, indicates that these short-term benefits are not enough to get rid of it altogether. Benefits that are available to all mothers of children under 18, such as child allowances, can help offset the long-term motherhood penalty for mothers of older children.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

  • Martin Luther King Jr. was ahead of his time in pushing for universal basic income
    Martin Luther King Jr. became involved not just in fights over racial equality but also economic hardship.Photo credit: Ted S. Warren/AP
    , , , ,

    Martin Luther King Jr. was ahead of his time in pushing for universal basic income

    He believed UBI could go a long way toward helping those oppressed by unjust systems.

    Each year on the holiday that bears his name, Martin Luther King Jr. is remembered for his immense contributions to the struggle for racial equality. What is less often remembered but equally important is that King saw the fight for racial equality as deeply intertwined with economic justice.

    To address inequality – and out of growing concern for how automation might displace workers – King became an early advocate for universal basic income. Under universal basic income, the government provides direct cash payments to all citizens to help them afford life’s expenses.

    In recent years, more than a dozen U.S. cities have run universal basic income programs, often smaller or pilot programs that have offered guaranteed basic incomes to select groups of needy residents. As political scientists, we have followed these experiments closely.

    One of us recently co-authored a study which found that universal basic income is generally popular. In two out of three surveys analyzed, majorities of white Americans supported a universal basic income proposal. Support is particularly high among those with low incomes.

    King’s intuition was that white people with lower incomes would support this type of policy because they could also benefit from it. In 1967, King argued, “It seems to me that the Civil Rights Movement must now begin to organize for the guaranteed annual income … which I believe will go a long, long way toward dealing with the Negro’s economic problem and the economic problem with many other poor people confronting our nation.”

    But there is one notable group that does not support universal basic income: those with higher levels of racial resentment. Racial resentment is a scale that social scientists have used to describe and measure anti-Black prejudice since the 1980s.

    Economic self-interest can trump resentment

    At the same time, the results of the study also suggest that coalition building is possible, even among the racially resentful.

    Economic status matters. Racially resentful whites with lower incomes tend to be supportive of universal basic income. In short, self-interest seems to trump racial resentment. This is consistent with King’s idea of how an economic coalition could be built and pave the way toward racial progress.

    Race, Income, Safety net, Martin Luther King Day, Universal basic income (UBI), Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK), Affordability
    As mayor of Stockton, Calif., Michael Tubbs ran a pioneering program that provided a basic income to a limited number of residents. Rich Pedroncelli/AP

    Income is not the only thing that shapes attitudes, however. Some of the strongest supporters of universal basic income are those who have higher incomes but low levels of racial resentment. This suggests an opportunity to build coalitions across economic lines, something King believed was necessary. “The rich must not ignore the poor,” he argued in his Nobel Peace Prize lecture, “because both rich and poor are tied in a single garment of destiny.” Our data shows that this is possible.

    This approach to coalition building is also suggested by our earlier research. Using American National Election Studies surveys from 2004-2016, we found that for white Americans, racial resentment predicted lower support for social welfare policies. But we also found that economic position mattered, too.

    Economic need can unite white Americans in support of more generous welfare policies, including among some who are racially prejudiced. At a minimum, this suggests that racial resentment does not necessarily prevent white Americans from supporting policies that would also benefit Black Americans.

    Building lasting coalitions

    During his career as an activist in the 1950s and 1960s, King struggled with building long-term, multiracial coalitions. He understood that many forms of racial prejudice could undermine his work. He therefore sought strategies that could forge alliances across lines of difference. He helped build coalitions of poor and working-class Americans, including those who are white. He was not so naive as to think that shared economic progress would eliminate racial prejudice, but he saw it as a place to start.

    Guaranteed income, Social programs, Universal basic income
    Martin Luther King Jr. believed Americans of different racial backgrounds could coalesce around shared economic interests. AP

    Currently, the nation faces an affordability crisis, and artificial intelligence poses new threats to jobs. These factors have increased calls for universal basic income.

    Racial prejudice continues to fuel opposition to universal basic income, as well as other forms of social welfare. But our research suggests that this is not insurmountable.

    As King knew, progress toward economic equality is not inevitable. But, as his legacy reminds us, progress does remain possible through organizing around shared interests.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

Explore More Money Stories

Culture

Denmark’s generous parental leave policies erase eighty percent of the ‘motherhood penalty’

Justice

Martin Luther King Jr. was ahead of his time in pushing for universal basic income

Editorial

People now say that secondhand gifts are classier than those that are brand new

Everyday Economics

Man breaks down how much he makes from Uber, enraging both drivers and passengers