conditions of employment of the servitors. This
element simply enjoys the grandiloquent role of Bestower of Largess. But
the vast majority of Americans has followed the custom under duress.
This majority finds it repugnant to tip on the assumption that the
employee alone profits by its generosity; and to discover that the
employer as well profits by it--in fact secretly devises methods of
encouraging the tipping--will confirm the majority in the thought that
the custom is wholly bad.

Under which school of economics, or ethics, can such a system be
justified?

The assertion of employers that tipping is the spontaneous impulse of
patrons and that they cannot afford to pay living wages in addition is
seen to be without foundation in conspicuous instances. Such spontaneity
as exists they stimulate and exploit for their own profit.

Conceding that the development of tipping has thrown employment upon an
abnormal basis, the question arises, if tipping is abolished should the
increase in wages be borne exclusively by the employer?

To the extent that employers make extraordinary dividends out of the
custom the extra cost of operation through normal wages should be borne
by them without increased tariffs to patrons. Competition in the hotel
business, for example, has been adjusted to the custom of tipping and
the sudden throwing of a bona fide wage system upon such employers,
without an increase in revenues, would be disastrous.

A REASONABLE SOLUTION

The solution in certain instances might be found in a joint obligation
of patron and employer. The employer says: "I have been able to give you
food at such and such a price because I have not had to charge to it the
cost of waiter hire. If the public discontinues gratuities to my
employees, I must raise the price of food to cover this deficit." The
patron replies: "Upon proof that your food tariffs have not included
the item of waiter-hire, I will pay more for my meals if they are served
free."

The goal of a reform in tipping is to make one payment--and that one to
the employer--cover every expense of the patron.

Even if the public should have to pay more for food, lodging and other
service, if tipping is abolished, an immense advance in sound economics
and democratic ethics would be made in eliminating the double-payment
system. Where two payments are made--to employer and employee--it is
inevitable that the patron will lose.

It should be understood, however,