New charge on dinner tab is in bad taste

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The latest hidden mandatory add-on is a “health” charge added to restaurant bills. This scam cropped up first in San Francisco, but you can count on it to spread.

Nothing succeeds in the travel industry like a bad idea. The latest hidden mandatory add-on is a "health" charge added to restaurant bills. As far as I know, this scam cropped up first in San Francisco, but you can count on it to spread.

The rationale for this one is to cover the employers' mandatory contribution to the City's "Healthy San Francisco" health-coverage system. The charge actually is levied on employers, but at least some restaurants are adding a few dollars or percentage points to each customer's bill to cover this charge.

The restaurants' excuse for assessing this charge separately is to let customers know how much they're paying for employees' health coverage. That's the same excuse hotels use when they add "resort" or "housekeeping" fees to unsuspecting guests' room bills. It's the same excuse airlines would use to exclude fuel surcharges from their advertised fares if the Department of Transportation would allow them. And it's sheer nonsense. Employees' health insurance is no less of a cost of doing business than rent, property taxes, food costs, security services and all the other inputs businesses require to operate. To single out health care for a separate surcharge is unwarranted.

The restaurants adding this fee self-righteously proclaim, "It's not hidden; we print a notice on our menus." But that, too, is nonsense: Presumably, restaurants could apply that same rationale for extra fees to cover the cost of electricity, heat or linen service. I haven't seen any reports yet that San Francisco hotels are adding a similar charge. But hotels aren't shy about piling on other fees and charges.

So far, I haven't heard of "health" fees anywhere other than San Francisco. But, as noted, bad ideas travel fast, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it copied in one form or another by restaurants in other areas.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/famil...0,6658174.story

[Dan J 277]

IN a single payer health care system, doing this would make sense in some cases, as some of the cost of healthcare could be paid by costly choices. Sort of like how you would pay higher insurance rates as a smoker.

Although outside of certain foods like soft drinks, its kind of hard to quantify the health cost of that choice.

[Fandango 1,439]

IN a single payer health care system, doing this would make sense in some cases, as some of the cost of healthcare could be paid by costly choices. Sort of like how you would pay higher insurance rates as a smoker.

Although outside of certain foods like soft drinks, its kind of hard to quantify the health cost of that choice.

If I read it correctly, it has nothing to do with the 'health' value of the food, but adding a surcharge to cover the restaurant's employee health bennies.

[Dan J 277]

If I read it correctly, it has nothing to do with the 'health' value of the food, but adding a surcharge to cover the restaurant's employee health bennies.

It does look like that is the case. If its a business expense it will end up as part of the bill, either as an overhead cost, or additional fee/service charge.

[Calypso 464]

Not related to the OP but I just want to make a comment.

In all restaurants that my husband and I have gone to here in the U.S., none of them would add the tax ahead in the menu price listing. I got used to the Philippine way wherein all prices-- from restaurants to grocery stores-- VAT is already counted. I know that VAT and sales tax are two different things. I take it that we must be paying sales tax here in the U.S. after everything has been totaled.

Furthermore, restaurants in my country don't expect tips. I got so surprised when my husband left some cash on the table when he first visited me in Cebu. Filipinos keep their change even if it's merely 25 centavos. My husband explained to me the purpose of giving tips and he said it should be at least 10% of the total bill. Well, his explanation was reasonable enough.

[Fandango 1,439]

It actually should be 15% at the minimum....

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It actually should be 15% at the minimum....

I go with 10% - 20% depending on the actual service rendered. Places where I leave a 10% tip only are not places I would return to, however. At my regular eateries around town, I typically leave 20%.

But back to topic, just where does Pelosi fit into this thread title? Merely because it talks about SF? Is Nancy running the restaurant business in that town - or the city, for that matter? Last I checked, she was Speaker of the House of Representatives. Not sure that she's in a position to make restaurant businesses add health cost surcharges to the customer's check.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Quite an old story actually. Its been around for at least 3 years now.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Quite an old story actually. Its been around for at least 3 years now.

Yeah, but it takes a few years for it to reach the Chicago Tribune, like many stories, even in their own neighborhood.

Speaking of San Francisco, there was a very nice bar and grill not too far from the old Custom's House, where the local USCIC office is located. They had killer burgers and fries. It had an Irish name for the place, if I remember right. Not too many places to dine in that neighborhood.

Edited March 3, 2010 by Lone Ranger

[Calypso 464]

Yeah, but it takes a few years for it to reach the Chicago Tribune, like many stories, even in their own neighborhood.

Speaking of San Francisco, there was a very nice bar and grill not too far from the old Custom's House, where the local USCIC office is located. They had killer burgers and fries. It had an Irish name for the place, if I remember right. Not too many places to dine in that neighborhood.

My husband and I went to Sotto Mare in San Francisco on Monday for dinner. The Yelp reviews are right. Sotto Mare's cioppino and sauteed scallops are the best.

[scandal 951]

The restaurants adding this fee self-righteously proclaim, "It's not hidden; we print a notice on our menus." But that, too, is nonsense: Presumably, restaurants could apply that same rationale for extra fees to cover the cost of electricity, heat or linen service.

Shh. Don't give them any ideas.

As to tips, and the discussion of 10, 15 or 20%, do you guys calculate on the pre or post-tax amount?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Shh. Don't give them any ideas.

As to tips, and the discussion of 10, 15 or 20%, do you guys calculate on the pre or post-tax amount?

Depends on the tax rate. In California, I might start paying attention to the distinction.

[Calypso 464]

Shh. Don't give them any ideas.

As to tips, and the discussion of 10, 15 or 20%, do you guys calculate on the pre or post-tax amount?

Arbind decides after the tax is counted. Some restaurants have "suggested tip amounts" anyway.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

As to tips, and the discussion of 10, 15 or 20%, do you guys calculate on the pre or post-tax amount?

I calculate on the total and leave the tip in cash rather than adding it to the card transaction. Wait staff tends to like me. At my regular spots, I do receive outstanding service even if many of them aren't fancy places.