"Dining while black": tipping as social artifact.

Recent studies suggest that black American diners tend to tip less than white American diners. Rather than address tipping directly, this study uses in-depth interviews of white restaurant workers to frame the issue of how restaurant workers view and respond to customers of color. The present

research indicates that white American restaurant workers actively participate in derogatory stereotyping of black American customers, engaging in the use of racial code words and derogatory ethnic labels, while discriminating--both overtly and covertly--in their service interactions with black customers. Among other things, servers attempt to negotiate with other white employees to avoid having black parties seated in their sections and actively try to trade off such "undesirable" parties. Servers' logic regarding tipping is self-perpetuating in the sense that they avoid serving parties of black customers because they anticipate poor tips. These results suggest that evidence of racial tipping differences needs to be viewed cautiously in the service context in which they exist and that the industry should take special care to ensure that when servers serve black Americans, they should provide service that justifies a good tip.

Keywords: race relations; tipping; restaurants; discrimination

**********

Recent studies posit that black American diners often leave smaller tips than do white American diners. Using in-depth interviews of white restaurant workers (who dominate front-of-the-house positions), this study frames the issue according to how restaurant workers view and respond to customers of color. The research indicates that white American restaurant workers actively participate in derogatory stereotyping of black American customers, engage in the use of racial code words and derogatory ethnic labels, and discriminate in their service interactions with black customers. Among other things, servers attempt to negotiate with other employees to avoid having black parties seated in their section and actively try to trade off such "undesirable" parties. Servers~ logic is self-perpetuating in the sense that they avoid serving parties of black customers because they anticipate poor tips from those parties. These results suggest that evidence of racial tipping differences needs to viewed cautiously in the service context.

A majority of white Americans are fond of thinking that racism is a thing of the past and that black Americans no longer face intentional or widespread discrimination. (1) While overt, aggressive, institutionalized racism has been outlawed, many black Americans believe that a different set of rules applies for blacks than what applies to whites, and they understand that racism is an integral, permanent, and indestructible component of society. (2)

The restaurant-tipping debate introduced by Michael Lynn's accompanying article demonstrates one aspect of the divide in people's beliefs about racism. (3) To summarize this article, many white servers believe that the majority of black customers tip poorly regardless of how well they are served. Lynn considers this a matter of the need to educate black American customers on current tipping practices in the United States. In this article, however, we present a different perspective--a perspective in which tips by black Americans may, in fact, correlate with the level of service they receive. Based on our research, we see restaurants as an institution plagued by racial discrimination not unlike many other American institutions, places where black Americans face continued and various forms of racism, regardless of law or official policy. Our research focuses on tipping in the broader context of restaurant race relations and offers a lens by which to view tipping in the context of racial discrimination and continued racism in restaurants.

In an effort to extend the limited empirical work that exists on black Americans' experience as restaurant customers, this study examines one exemplar of everyday racism: the spoken and unspoken and organizational rituals that govern restaurant experiences. (4) Using in-depth interviews of restaurant workers, the study examines how restaurant workers (primarily, servers) address issues of race, explains how elements of social exchange (tipping in particular) play out in the restaurant's interracial "theater," and examines the extent to which restaurant workers view their racial stereotypes as rational beliefs. We ground our study within a broader institutional context, embedding this study's data points into the broad sweep of ingrained belief systems and institutionalized restaurant practices.

Institutional Misconduct and the Black American Experience

The majority of everyday examples that we introduce in this article involve interpersonal interactions between restaurant servers and customers, fellow servers, and dining-room hosts, hostesses, and managers. But as Feagin et al., Bell, and others suggest, when one speaks of differential access or opportunity based on biology, one cannot separate the interpersonal from the structural; they are in many ways variants of the same problem. (5) It is in this vein that one must begin to understand the historical precedents that still, some argue, govern black American customer experiences in a full range of leisure and commercial establishments.

Probably the best-known case of discriminatory malfeasance in the restaurant industry involves the Shoney's Corporation, in the case of Haynes v. Shoney's. (6) In 1992, after two years of bitter court battles related to a class-action lawsuit on behalf of 21,000 persons, the Shoney's Corporation settled the Haynes case for $132.5 million, the largest such settlement in United States history. (7) As detailed in the accompanying sidebar, the lawsuit included well-established examples of overt and covert racism on the part of Ray Danner, Shoney's cofounder and chair of its board, and other senior managers. With regard to formal policies and procedures, Shoney's was also found to lack an affirmative-action plan, a formal application process, and objective criteria for promotions.

Although most observers point to Haynes v. Shoney's as the most egregious example of formalized racist practices in the restaurant industry, serious charges have also been levied against Denny's (e.g., management's often publicized use of the word blackout as a code for having too many black customers in a Denny's restaurant at one time), Red Onion, International House of Pancakes, and Domino's. Also part of the restaurant industry's sad history was the case of the Sambo's restaurant chain. This firm drew human-rights complaints in the 1970s because its name invoked the stereotype from "Little Black Sambo." Indeed, the chain used the story's cartoon-type character as a logo. (11) In short, formal complaints against U.S. restaurant chains suggest complex and persistent patterns of discrimination related to race, power, and culture.

By the Numbers

To better understand differential patterns of treatment based on race, we present the following snapshot of the black American experience within the restaurant industry, which is the largest employer of service workers, regardless of race, in the United States. The numbers suggest distinct patterns of "preferred" roles and missed opportunities. Although black workers make up one-tenth of all those employed in the United States, black Americans constitute 13 percent of those in foodservice jobs. Sixteen percent of kitchen workers and 19 percent of cooks are black, compared with only 5 percent of waiters and waitresses and less than 3 percent of bartenders. (12)

The issue extends beyond the fact that black workers are more likely to be in the back of a restaurant than in the front. Few black Americans are to be found in the ranks of the industry's management, and few black entrepreneurs have been able to secure franchises in major family-restaurant chains. Black entrepreneurs have also had difficulty obtaining bank loans to start restaurants, either on their own or as part of a franchise arrangement. (13) With this background, we turn to our examination of blacks' experience as restaurant customers.

Dining While Black

In addition to examples of racial discrimination made evident in the Denny's and Shoney's cases, many research studies on racism indicate that discrimination in restaurant dining is not uncommon for black Americans. (14) Feagin and Sikes revealed the following forms of restaurant discrimination: black Americans were slow to be greeted, were seated in undesirable locations such as next to the kitchen or outside, and were largely ignored by service-staff members while dining. (15) Researchers have suggested that these examples are extensions of Jim Crow-era denials of service (16) and typify the more subtle and intangible acts that characterize today's "modern racism." (17)

In a study focusing on the leisure-travel experiences of black Americans, Willming found that 76 percent of the 131 people she surveyed reported some form of "rejection, harassment, threats, or verbal or physical attacks simply because of race" while eating in sit-down restaurants. Furthermore, 51 percent of those surveyed reported racial discrimination in the hotel or motel restaurants they visited, and 46 percent reported perceived discrimination while dining at fast-food restaurants. (18) A 1997 Gallup poll analyzed by the Urban Institute indicated 21 percent of black Americans had encountered race-based discrimination while dining out in the previous thirty days. (19) Collectively, these reports support the colloquial term "dining while black," marked by racial discrimination that is similar to the experience of "driving while black" (being stopped and searched for spurious reasons), "shopping while black" (being harassed or followed by store employees), and "hailing (a cab) while black" (being refused ride service).

Restaurants' Regressive Racial Climate

While research on discrimination in restaurants has focused on the experiences of customers as targets of prejudice, we know of little research regarding restaurant personnel as instruments of discrimination--particularly in terms of their attitudes and actions. As we noted at the outset, much of the work on race relations and restaurant workers focuses on the practice of tipping within restaurants and how tipping practices are possibly related to restaurant workers' perceptions, attitudes, and treatment of black Americans. (20)

Servers' a priori perceptions of tipping differences have been thought to be one possible explanation for discrimination against black American customers. Those servers who believe that black Americans do not tip well may then provide inferior service to black customers, which then in turn leads to lower tips--in a self-fulfilling prophecy. (That is one thesis presented by Lynn and Thomas-Haysbert.) Potential tipping differences aside, understanding the interpersonal and organizational rituals that govern the dining experience of black Americans may help to better explain discrimination on the part of some restaurant personnel.

An examination of the tipping.org Web site reveals that restaurant workers have much to say about restaurant race relations, particularly in conjunction with tipping habits. Notable threads are posted under headings such as "Minorities Don't Tip: True or False?" and "Why Don't the Majority of Black People Tip?" Such threads draw hundreds of candid responses that allege specific tipping behavior by black Americans in comparison to white Americans, as well as additional groups of Americans of color and international diners. Many of those who write negatively about black Americans are quick to explain that they are not "racist" or "prejudiced," even though they often say things that are indeed just that. (21)

Backstage Race Talk

As the discourse at the tipping Web site suggests, many restaurant workers rely on stereotypical knowledge schemas to guide their treatment of black Americans as customers. Many of the threads focus on racial stereotypes regarding tipping behavior, the shared understanding of and language used by white American restaurant workers regarding restaurant race relations, and the justification for differential and discriminatory treatment given to black American customers. As stated above, if restaurant personnel believe that black Americans tip less and are therefore less deserving of equal service, servers may give inferior service in the first place, thus eliciting the very tipping practices they abhor. (22) Poor tips become a confirmation of the servers' personal beliefs and contribute to the shared organizational knowledge. The cycle is perpetuated when existing servers' perceptions of their experiences generate a discourse that helps to shape incoming employees' belief structures.

The self-perpetuating nature of stereotypes has been studied both cognitively (23) and through private discourse. (24) Our research here relies on private discourse, such as what one would find in the (backstage) discussions among restaurant workers. Private discourse exists with relative selectivity and is negotiated within a restaurant lexicon that involves the coding of events, people, and beliefs. Research on private discourse and racial language by van Dijk suggests that both work to shape prejudice and discrimination. (25) As Myers and Williamson's work on backstage "race talk" suggests, individuals frequently make derogatory and stereotypical remarks about black Americans through shared backstage or private discourse among other white Americans. (26)

Backstage Race Relations

The responses by restaurant personnel at the tipping Web site highlight many current themes in racial and ethnic relations. "Old-fashioned" forms of racism, involving overt discrimination and open expression of anti-black attitudes and opinions, are now being disguised in more subtle forms of "modern racism" that involve the tacit expression of a racist belief system coupled with an abating acceptance of negatively expressed attitudes. (27) Many white Americans have become quite adept at presenting themselves as nonprejudiced individuals while still harboring many racist and stereotypical notions regarding race relations and black Americans. (28)

The notion of a "frontstage" and a backstage presentation of oneself has evolved into the concept of frontstage and backstage racism. (29) Similar to the idea of "aversive racism" that characterizes "the racial attitudes of many whites who endorse egalitarian values land] who regard themselves as nonprejudiced, but who discriminate in subtle, rationalizable ways," (30) the frontstage and backstage racism framework posits that individuals are adept at negotiating a nonprejudiced and socially appropriate frontstage presentation but may be more likely to reveal an openly prejudiced and racist self in a backstage setting that serves as a "safe space" for racist sentiment and action. (31) These ideas suggest that racial attitudes have become increasingly complex and nuanced in the sense that many prejudiced individuals will outwardly agree with egalitarian social and racial norms while actively avoiding their internalization. (32)

Examining the racial language and rituals that exist as part of the "everyday" thread of race relations in the restaurant is important, as people of color are often targets of negative and prejudicial stereotypes and suffer in multiple ways from interpersonal and organizational discrimination. (33) In an attempt to understand the individual and organizational purveyors of such discrimination, this study examines white American restaurant workers' knowledge of the rituals, processes, and language that govern the hiring and dining experiences of black Americans.

Interviewing Restaurant Employees

Sixteen white restaurant workers, thirteen women and three men, were interviewed for this study. Their ages ranged from nineteen to forty-six. All participants had worked in at least one table-service, chain restaurant or were currently doing so; work experience ranged from two months to twenty-five years. Participants worked in various parts of the United States, with most working in the southeast. The majority of the participants were college educated, with approximately half working while also attending college.

Procedure. In-depth interviews were conducted with the respondents. Located through personal contacts via phone, email, or in person while dining in restaurants throughout Florida, candidates were asked whether they would be willing to participate in a study on restaurant workers and restaurant race relations. Interviews were conducted at the location, date, and time of participants' choosing--usually in their homes. Two interviews were conducted at a quiet coffee shop, and three interviews were conducted in a room reserved at a university campus. Interview lengths spanned from twenty-five to ninety minutes. Informed consent and demographic information were collected from all participants. Interviews were audiotaped and later transcribed.

Participants were asked to describe their restaurant work experience, their knowledge of discrimination policies and diversity training in their restaurant(s), information about the racial composition of employees and customers, and their knowledge or perceptions about hiring practices. Participants were asked about the interpersonal aspects of their positions including how they would describe the "racial climate" of the restaurant(s); what they thought about black Americans' reports of discrimination; their perceptions of tipping across race, class, and gender lines; whether they could recall possible race-related language or incidents; and how they felt race was handled (in a general sense) at their place(s) of employment. If a given participant had work experience at more than one restaurant, she or he was asked to describe each restaurant in separate, distinct terms. Transcribed interviews were then analyzed using a grounded-theory framework. (34)

Racial Divides in Restaurant Employment

To clearly capture the underlying interpersonal and organizational rituals and processes related to the black American restaurant experience in hiring and dining, we first present the results related to the broad business context as experienced by participants, and then we delve into the frontstage and backstage interactions that serve as the framework for understanding the individual and institutional practices that govern black Americans' experiences in restaurants.

Hiring practices at the restaurants covered by this study suggest a pattern of differential hiring practices and a form of employee "steering" toward front-of-the-house and back-of-the-house positions. Nearly all of the respondents reported that front-of-the-house positions tended to be filled by white Americans, while people of color were usually given back-of-the-house positions, especially those that offered lesser status and lower pay. In that regard, one hostess noted,

   Um, it's ... predominantly white [laugh].
   Everybody who works, who works at any
   of the restaurants I have, like especially
   server-wise has been white. Anybody of
   any other ethnicity has been either in the
   kitchen or um, yeah, either like a line
   cook or a dishwasher.... If there is a
   black person in the restaurant, urn, or
   even like a Hispanic person, they'll usually
   be in the kitchen.

Another hostess elaborated using front-and back-of-the-house descriptions, as follows:

   I think the back of the house, the people
   like the cooks and cleaners, the
   majority are African American. The
   front, the hostesses are all white, and
   maybe there are three servers who are
   black.... There's like one black manager
   and five white ones. The majority
   of the back of the house are African
   American.

The responses of our respondents regarding their restaurants are similar to reports from other institutions where few white Americans have close, equal-status, personal contacts with people of color. (35) Many of our respondents had to pause to think of any people of color with whom they had worked. For instance, one server asked us to give her a minute to "rack her brain" as she tried to recall a single person of color with whom she worked. Another respondent, a server who had worked in a variety of front- and back-of-the-house positions in her twenty-five years of experience was shocked when she realized the following:

   In fact, I don't know that I've ever
   worked in a restaurant--in all the years
   that I've worked--that I've worked next
   to a black server! That I've ever had
   that ... that I've ever even had that situation!
   I can't ever remember, looking
   back, that I've ever worked with a black
   server! Um....

As the veteran server's account above suggests, one can work for decades in a restaurant without having the opportunity to have an equal-status contact with a person of color. When asked to reflect on that realization, this server elaborated,

   I don't know! I find it bizarre! Until right
   now, I guess I never really put a lot of
   thought into it, but since you're asking ...
   um, I would say it probably has a
   lot to do with race ... that, unfortunately,
   if you are black, they don't want you to
   be in the service industry, where you're
   out in the front of the house--on the
   front lines, you know. Um, maybe they
   think that the customers think that
   blacks are dirty ... um, I don't know! I
   don't know what the reasoning would
   be, but I do ... looking back on it right
   now find it pretty strange that there wasn't
   more of a mixture of blacks and
   whites working side by side!

Notice that this respondent quickly speculated that customers will think "blacks are dirty" and that those who do the hiring would not want black Americans in front-of-the-house positions. Not only does this reasoning involve an egregious anti-black belief, but this is known as "consumer discrimination," a form of employment discrimination in which employers hire employees based on the racial composition of their consumer base or by attempting to anticipate consumers' racial desires. (36) In particular, this type of discrimination is found to affect positions that involve direct customer contact. (37)

Although our study involved race, we found that many of the accounts given by respondents indicated that positions within the restaurant align not only by race but also by gender. Every respondent in the sample mentioned that white American males filled the management and ownership positions in the restaurant, with few people of color or women working in such positions. One server tried to recall a black manager but could not do so:

   I'm trying to remember if I've ever
   worked with ... a manager in a restaurant
   that hasn't, that has been anything
   other than white? No, in all three restaurants
   I worked at, all of my managers
   have, all my managers have been white
   males, with the exception [that] I've had
   two female managers, you know, that
   have kind of come and gone, you know,
   a couple months period.... Both of them
   were white.

The intersection of race and gender was also prominent for the hostess position, as this server recalled that the hostess position also required a certain look to be hired:

   I had one black girl that worked at the
   Shrimp House, out of the two years that I
   worked there, as a hostess. And the only
   reason I think that she was allowed to
   work there, was because she was really
   cute ... and she was thin, and she was
   very trendy like all the other cute little
   hostess-types that they hired ... and she
   was a friend of someone who knew
   someone. She came with a very good
   recommendation, but, um, yeah. That's
   the only time! In the two years of working
   there, I never worked with a black
   server.

The peculiar language used by this respondent, indicating that the young hostess was "allowed" to work at the restaurant, is worth noting. Perhaps this is to suggest that she would be prohibited from holding that position if she did not meet the criteria of being cute, thin, and trendy. In short, despite her skin color, she was enough like all the other "cute little hostess-types" and recommended through a personal contact for the job. (38)

In their totality, these study findings suggest a pattern of differential hiring practices and a form of steering employees toward different positions. At the same time, many respondents had been able to successfully navigate their employment within the restaurant without having to examine how privilege may have played a role in their own hiring or how their racial identity marked their positions within the restaurant. Nearly all respondents worked in the front of the house, and they consequently had had little opportunity to work side by side with people of color. That situation reinforced certain prejudicial attitudes, as explained next.

Setting the Backstage for a Culture of White Servers

The "behind the scenes" or backstage context of the culture of workers is shaped by the dichotomous racial composition of front- and back-of-the-house positions. The interview data reveal that a "culture of white servers" exists in the restaurants described in our sample. In this culture, white servers relate to each other in sharing the experience of dealing directly with customers and working for tips. Differential access to server positions excludes people of color from joining the ranks of this culture of white servers, as many respondents revealed. As one server pointed out, "There are a lot of racial divides in the restaurant."

Respondents shared that these divides provided a means by which white servers were able to actively exclude themselves from other workers backstage, using a private racial language that was deliberately hidden from people of color and from managers. The racial language reflected a relatively widespread anti-black belief system that took the form of the use of racial code words and a reliance on racial stereotypes to guide the level of service black Americans would receive. The interview data cited numerous examples of how white workers actively engaged in backstage racial and stereotypical language to denigrate black American diners and how this shaped their front-stage dining experiences.

Canadians, Cousins, Moolies, and "White People"

We found that many of the restaurant workers described in this study actively engaged in racially based coding of people, actions, and ideas. This backstage, codified racial language is consistent with Toni Morrison's term "race talk," meaning coding primarily used to degrade "others"--that is, people of color. (39) One respondent spoke directly about servers' use of racial language in backstage areas:

   It's only behind closed doors. Like, you
   know, like they would never go out into
   like "the real world" and, you know, like
   call somebody a "nigger," or anything
   like that. Like they wouldn't do that. It's
   not that type of overt, prejudiced racism.
   But it is a closed-door joking, kidding
   around.

That assessment of the backdrop by which white servers can openly share racist sentiments among other white servers begins to reveal the backstage existence of race talk in the restaurant. To avoid using the term nigger even in the restaurant's backstage, white servers in one respondent's restaurant used the word Canadians as a code word for black Americans, as follows:

   When a table, you know, a black table
   were to come into the restaurant, a lot of
   people ... there's a code word at my restaurant
   that's called "Canadian," and so,
   being a hostess, I get asked a lot by the
   servers, don't seat me with "Canadians.'"
   And that's known throughout the restaurant
   as "don't seat me with black people"
   because they're not tipped well or
   they don't tip well and you know, you're
   just gonna, it's just gonna be an aggravation,
   and that's what the general consensus
   in the restaurant is, is that it's just
   gonna be a big aggravation to have that
   table sit in your section because it's
   gonna be a waste of time for you.

Other respondents cited the identical use of that term or words like it in other restaurants. Code words included cousins, moolies, and even white people. (40) When asked, most respondents could not explain the possible origin of the code words. Deciphering what the code words meant was described as part of the informal employee "training." One respondent explained the nonliteral use of the term white people in the backstage areas of her restaurant:

   You had to kind of, like try to ... read
   between the lines so you could figure out
   what people were saying. We had a couple
   of servers, a lot--well, quite a few
   servers, who would come back to the
   back stage area and would say, "I hate
   white people." I remember the first time
   I heard that; I thought, "that is kind of
   striking." And then I noticed that [those
   servers] were serving a black family, for
   example. So that became a racially
   coded way in which they could express
   their racist sentiment yet still do it in a
   nonracist way. So it just became this
   kind of racist schizophrenia.

The "racist schizophrenia" noted by that respondent shows use of racial code words in presenting oneself as nonracist. White servers can use code words openly and appear nonracist while still harboring negative racist sentiments. (41) As such, "speaking nasty about black people" can be done with ease as black customers and employees are not privy to the words' meanings. (42)

When other respondents in the sample were questioned about the existence of code words, one hostess recalled that there was not necessarily a use of code words but a more discreet form of coding. She shared,

   Servers would come up and say ...
   "don't seat me with 'these people'"
   instead of just saying, "don't seat me
   with 'black people.'"

Another respondent's answer highlighted that among some workers, there was little need for words in code. Servers would say directly, "don't seat me with black people," instead of using terms to conceal their prejudice. In nearly all of the interviews, racial coding was linked to the pervasive derogatory stereotyping of black American diners.

Stereotyping of Black American Customers

Stereotypes of black American customers ranged from the types of foods they would order ("chicken fingers" and "free waters") to the alleged breaking of "acceptable" customer roles. As one server explained, "They [black customers] tend to be very snappy, and 'do this, do this,' like "ma'am,' snap in your face, and then don't leave you any tip, so most people don't want to serve them willingly." In every one of the interviews, the shared sentiment and "common knowledge" among white restaurant workers was that black Americans do not tip well, and as such, servers should "not waste their time" on these customers. (43)

Although there is some research suggesting that there may be ethnic tipping differences and that black Americans tend to tip less than white Americans, our study elucidates possible tipping differences in the context of everyday racism." (44) Indeed, as we explain next, many respondents articulated how stereotypes regarding black American customers shaped the prejudices of white servers and justified the numerous accounts of discriminatory actions reported in the interviews.

Attitudes Shaping Action

As we indicated above, in all of our interviews, tables of black diners were described as the most unwelcome of restaurant clientele, with servers going as far as to tell hostesses at the beginning of work shifts, "Oh, if a black table comes in, don't give it to me. Give it to so and so.... I don't want it." If a server was not able to get his or her way with a hostess, servers would often come up with other methods for dealing with "unwanted" tables directed toward hostesses: "Do you hate me or something?"; "I don't understand. Did I do something wrong?"; and "I hope you're glad that I won't be making any money tonight!" From a hostess's perspective, servers were described as "really pissed off like it's our fault that we sat them, you know, with a table that is gonna tip them poorly." One respondent recalled being harassed by angry white servers: "Everyone yelled at me when I gave [a black table] to them." Another shared the following:

   When servers get aggravated at this restaurant
   they tend to ... want to want to
   yell and take it out on me and things like
   that. Not at me personally, but like the
   hostess staff, they'll come up and be
   like, "Gosh, why did you seat me at that
   table?" ... you know, just that automatic
   reaction, "Oh, you sat me with a black
   table."

The use of "hushed tones" and "silent looks" was also shared as a tactic used to keep racist sentiment private while still conveying an unwillingness to serve black customers. Two respondents recalled how servers would express this refusal when black diners would enter:

   You know, when they see them walking
   with who seats them, if they're standing
   at the servers' station behind me I'll
   hear, hear them whisper somethin' like,
   "Not my section. Not my section." And
   they'll give me, you know, kind of like
   "eyes" as I'm walking them back
   through the restaurant. Kind of, you
   know, give me a look. And it's kind of
   like a "Don't seat them in my section"
   type look that they give.

   I know a couple of servers who will get
   very mad if a hostess even seats them a
   black table.... I know a couple of servers
   who ... get very upset. I'm friends
   with a couple of different hostesses who
   have said things about a couple of different
   [servers who become angry at them].
   I think they kind of make eye contact
   when [black customers] are there but
   they'll talk to them afterwards.

Here we begin to see a breakdown of hidden and hushed racial language regarding tipping, as white servers assume that white hostesses should share the anti-black sentiment and also empathize with their negative attitudes by not seating black customers in their sections.

"Pass the Table"

Many respondents suggested that servers viewed a table of black American diners as a punishment delivered by hostesses or by other servers, who would try to rid themselves of the duty. One server shared that her white coworkers would "beg me to take [a black table] away from them if I was waitressing myself." Other respondents elaborated on the ritual. One called it "the servers' game of 'Pass the Table.'" Another respondent described how servers in her restaurant would try to "make deals" and "swap tables" when they did not want to serve black customers. One hostess explained how this "game" worked:

   A black table would come in and sit
   down. Generally what would happen is
   that a waiter is assigned a section of
   tables and whenever someone sits in
   that section they're responsible for that
   table. They would try to have somebody
   else take it, you know, "I'll do this," "I'll
   give you my next so and so table if you do
   this."

Another server added, "I've heard remarks from other servers ... 'Uh, I don't want to take that table 'cause they're black--they won't tip' whatever, you know." While servers play Pass the Table, dissatisfactory service has already begun. The precedent is set for the rest of the dining experience. As such, empirical examinations of potential tipping differences must provide a sufficient degree of context regarding the customers' experience.

Service with a Smirk

When one server was asked what would happen when servers would have to take an unwanted table, she commented, "I think that if they have to take the table, I think that they just give them the minimal.... I don't think they go out of their way, I don't think they go out of their way to be friendly. I think they just do it, because they have to, basically." Another server reflected the following sentiment: "Sometimes the people [servers] who would take care of them [black American diners] wouldn't give the best service because they didn't think they were going to tip well." In that vein, another said that the potential for poor service is evident:

   I could see how they would say that [i.e.,
   that black Americans face racial discrimination];
   I know that when servers
   get a black table they are not particularly
   happy. They're approaching that table
   thinking that they already have a bad tip.

   So, why give someone good service to
   try to prove you wrong when it's so
   much easier to have them prove you
   right?

Many of the respondents in the study talked at length about a hostile racial climate toward black diners and described a backstage where white servers' stereotypical beliefs took shape in the form of neglect and poor service. One respondent commented,

   I think they're [black American diners]
   treated poorly.... It seems like the ones
   [servers] that have that attitude going in,
   get poor tips.... I do think that the people
   with the racist sentiments going into
   it do place those on their tables and on
   the service that they give to them [black
   American diners].

This respondent and several others appeared to recognize a self-fulfilling prophecy--that if restaurant personnel believe that black Americans tip less and are therefore less deserving of equal service, servers may then, in fact, provide inferior service (which would then, theoretically, lead to "substandard" tipping behavior. (45) One server spoke at length about that negative cycle:

   The servers that are getting the bad tips
   from black tables are the ones who go
   into it thinking they're getting a bad tip
   so they're not giving the right service ...
   the best service they can. So it's like a
   big cycle.... And it's really aggravating
   to me because I think it just perpetuates
   their opinion of black customers.... If
   you give them bad service 'cause you
   have that idea going into it, then they're
   going to tip you poorly! I do think that
   the people with racist sentiments going
   into it place those on the table and in the
   service that they give to them.

When they give poor service to black diners (and therefore merit a small tip), white servers are able to confirm their preconceived notions of black Americans' tipping habits. Those servers feel "burned" and contribute their experiences to the shared discourse among fellow (white) servers. Not only are these self-fulfilling and self-perpetuating stereotypes calamitous for black Americans, but they also fuel the culture of anti-black beliefs, language, and action within the backstage.

Serving Up Discrimination

As the accounts from hostesses reveal, servers expect hostesses to "respect" the servers' racist sentiment toward black American customers. In short, hostesses were not to seat black American customers in the "wrong" sections. One hostess shared an informal strategy to avoid being yelled at by angry servers: "I know this sounds terrible, but you kind of distributed the [black] tables out.... Everybody had to pay their dues." Another respondent's strategy for dealing with servers involved a more formal stance that involved reporting discrimination to management:

   There's been times where I've had like
   the entire serving staff come up to me
   and tell me, "Don't seat me with Canadians."
   So, I went, I've gone up to my manager
   before and I've said, "All right,
   look, I'm gonna go ahead and put, since
   no server in this restaurant wants to deal
   with black people, I'm gonna put a sign
   on the door saying, 'No black people
   allowed.' We'll go back to segregation,
   because obviously no server in here
   wants to serve them." And that, I think
   that really made a point to my manager.

After this incident, this hostess reported that management began taking servers' racial language and discriminatory service more seriously:

   And now, everybody in the restaurant,
   when they are hired, they have to sign a
   piece of paper that says you won't ... I
   don't know exactly what it says, but it
   pretty much says you won't, you know,
   treat tables differently based on race.
   "We are a non-racist restaurant." So that
   is something that has been implemented
   since I've said, made that comment to
   my manager ... but it's not something
   that's like readily enforced. Like ... the
   "Canadian" word is still thrown around.
   You know, as much as it has been.

Even after this incident and even with managers' official "nondiscrimination" dictum, we still see that the rituals and climate within the restaurant remain intact--and the supposed policy is not enforced.

One server suggested that management may in fact aid de facto discriminatory practices by adding mandatory gratuity (called "giving credit" in restaurant jargon) to black tables but not to white ones;

   You have to get a manager to do it, and
   otherwise you can just give them the
   check if you don't credit, and actually
   the majority of the people, when they're
   black, they'll go ahead and give them the
   credit. Because the majority of the people
   who are black leave bad tips.

In this server's perception, formal policies are being bent and distorted differentially and would stand in direct contrast to the widespread rhetoric regarding diversity goals and nondiscrimination by management.

Frontstage and Backstage Interview Presentation

As Dovidio and Gaertner's "aversive racism" framework suggests, many servers may be operating under the assumption that they give equal service to black and white diners and that they are indeed nonprejudiced, even though they harbor negative beliefs about black Americans that may express themselves in unconscious discriminatory exchanges with black Americans. (46) Many of the respondents themselves stated that they always gave equal service to everyone, and most reported that they had not experienced tipping differences at all. It appeared that for this sample, tipping differences and anti-black prejudice had simply not occurred for them individually--at all. However, when the interview began to delve more deeply into respondents' personal attitudes and actions and began to share them toward the end of their interviews, the stories changed, as we explain below.

As many of the interviews progressed, respondents who had earlier stated the importance of diversity training, extolled the virtues of black Americans diners, and essentially demonized the "racist" servers who worked around them, revealed paradoxical views later in their interviews. In the slippery politics of presenting one's self as nonprejudiced, it appeared that some respondents revealed much more than they had to meant to say about their own actions and beliefs. One server who had stated earlier that diversity in the workplace was important, hedged later when she shared her views on affirmative action in hiring, as follows:

   I mean, I don't know. I, I mean, I hope a
   lot of people base it on their, how qualified
   they are other than ... a race issue,
   because that's just, I won't say it's getting
   old, but I mean, I don't want to say
   I'm tired of hearing it, but you know,
   it's ... I don't know. It's the littlest
   things, just always brought up and it's,
   you know, we're ... just keep beating a
   dead horse. But, you know, it's ... I
   don't think they realize the situation can
   be reversed. Sometimes, you know, it's
   always, like, well, I'm always getting
   treated bad. My ancestors were slaves,
   you know?

Later in the interview, this respondent added,

   Yeah, it, I mean ... everybody, I'm sure,
   everybody has had bad treatment in their
   life. And, or you know, poor customer
   service, and you know, I don't think it
   could be because of your color. I think it
   could be because of the worker. And
   they just don't care. And maybe they're
   busy or they have something else on
   their minds. So, it's always, you know,
   there's always something behind the
   reason why you got treated poorly.

According to this server, there are many reasons why someone has been treated poorly, yet "color" is quickly discarded. She does note that poor service could be a result of the "worker." Her comments also echo the results of this study in the sense that a worker may indeed be busy or indeed "not care" about black diners because that server adheres to tipping stereotypes and derogatory racial beliefs. This respondent's stance, though, omits any possibility of racially motivated discrimination. By stating that "everybody has had bad treatment in their life," she neutralizes the seriousness of poor treatment. At the end of the interview, this server reflected on her own comments, "Wow, that was getting a little racist there at the end." Bonilla-Silva noted that that diminutive tactic allows white Americans to "soften their racial blows" and to "cushion their views" on topics of race. (47)

Other servers reflected on their own behavior with reluctance, as one male server shared, "I ... I hate to admit, but ... I try to give everyone, um, same service, but I try to concentrate myself on tables who I know are going to tip well." This server cited "businessmen" and "middle-aged women" as those he thought would tip the most, so he would give the best service to these tables above black American diners, who he noted tipped less on average. This particular server would explain what the other servers around him would do first in his interview and then later reveal that he, too, engaged in such behavior.

Another server, who had earlier related always having positive views of black clientele, later shared that she refused to serve two black women who frequented the restaurant. She cited that she had waited only once on these two women, whom she referred to as "sistas," and that they "ran me back and forth.... They returned everything to the kitchen and were a pain." When asked why she refused to be seated with them again, she paused and exclaimed, "It's not 'cause they're black! It's because they're a pain in my ass!" By attempting to save face by stating that her refusal was not racially motivated, this server can maintain that she is just as nonprejudiced as she was at the beginning of her interview.

These accounts indicate that many of the respondents in our study attempted to keep up a good frontstage and backstage presentation, even while explaining how "racist" those around them were and then later admitting to committing the same discriminatory acts. While some of the respondents may be true to the antiracist statements and actions they claim, many of these accounts indicate the relative ease with which many white Americans navigate two social worlds while employing two separate selves--the front- and the backstage.

Conclusion

This study has explored the spoken and unspoken interpersonal and organizational backstage rituals that govern the black American restaurant experience. It has explained how elements of social exchange (particularly tipping) play out in an interracial theater of action, how some personnel profess a tacit "rationality" of racial stereotypes, and how there exists a dichotomous picture of a frontstage restaurant experience governed by widely accepted modes of conduct (the "happy face") and a backstage experience that is replete with racist rituals governing how people are seated, how they are served, and how race has become a core issue in the interactions between restaurant workers and restaurant clientele.

We found that racist rituals are reflected both in the restaurant's organizational structure and interpersonal relations. Because the frontstage behavior is governed by maintaining the appearance of acceptable modes of behavior, discriminatory action is subtle and difficult to detect. Nevertheless, racist speech and action in the backstage spill over to the frontstage in many examples given by our respondents. Their comments suggest that racial rituals are more common than one would expect, given restaurants' claims to the contrary. This was evident in the respondents' vague knowledge of antidiscrimination policies, a lack of diversity training, and a notable racial dichotomy between front-and back-of-the-house workers.

The results of the study suggest that restaurant race relations are shaped by a pervasive stereotyping of customers of color by white restaurant workers. The intricate use and negotiation of racial code words and racial stereotyping indicates a strong need for diversity training, in conjunction with an aggressive hiring and restructuring effort within the industry. Organizational aspects that may be supportive of a "culture of white servers" need to be examined more closely. As some of our respondents noted, there is a certain level of informal learning that runs concurrently with formal employment training. How much this "invisible" culture molds new workers would be an interesting topic of study. Might the invisible culture transcend formal training in perpetuating racist discourse and action?

The fact that many of the servers in the study appear to feel justified in their prejudicial and discriminatory treatment of black American diners substantiates the reports of black Americans that they have experienced racial discrimination in the form of dining while black.

Areas for more research. Although the restaurant workers in our sample had been employed in many areas of the country, most respondents worked in the southeastern United States. Further research is needed to examine how servers treat racial differences in a variety of rural and urban areas. This sample was also predominantly female. Most of these women spoke extensively about sexism and sexual harassment from management, customers, and fellow employees. Some believed that the perceived status of restaurants as not being "real" places of work permitted that sexism, along with the racism that we have documented. Further work on the intersections of racism and sexism will be necessary to examine how they shape both women's and men's experiences.

Finally, many of the restaurant workers at tipping.org claim that people of color who work in restaurants also participate in the stereotyping of black customers. In contrast to that claim, our interview data reveal tight-knit groups of whites who purposely exclude people of color in their racial language and joking. The extant literature suggests that black Americans face a great deal of discrimination in the workplace and that the restaurant industry is not unique in this regard. Restaurant workers' experiences may vary greatly based on racial identity and position within the distinct organizational spheres of front and back of the house, thus shaping the restaurant experiences of all diners.

Endnotes

(1.) Joe R. Feagin, Hernan Vera, and Pinar Batur, White Racism, 2nd ed. (New York: Routledge, 2001).

(2.) Derrick Bell, Faces at the Bottom of the Well: The Permanence of Racism (New York: Basic Books, 1992).

(3.) See: Michael Lynn, "Ethnic Differences in Tipping: A Matter of Familiarity with Tipping Norms," on pages 12-22 of this Cornell Quarterly.

(4.) For example, see: Samuel Juni, Robert Branno, and Michelle M. Roth, "Sexual and Racial Discrimination in Service-seeking Interactions: A Field Study in Fast-Food and Commercial Establishments," Psychological Reports, vol. 63 (1988), pp. 71-76.

(5.) Feagin et al., op. cit.; and Bell, op. cit.

(6.) Steve Watkins, The Black O: Racism and Redemption in an American Corporate Empire (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1997).

(7.) Ibid.

(8.) Ibid.

(9.) Kirkus Reviews, Review of The Black O: Racism and Redemption in an American Corporate Empire, by Steve Watkins (Athens: University of Georgia Press, September 15, 1997).

(10.) Steve Watkins, "Racism Du Jour at Shoney's." Nation, October 1993, pp. 426-27.

(11.) Feagin et al., op. cit.

(12.) Ibid.

(13.) Ibid.

(14.) For example, see: Philomena Essed, Everyday Racism: Reports of Women from Two Countries, (Claremont, CA: Hunter House, 1990); Joe R. Feagin, "The Continuing Significance of Race: Antiblack Discrimination in Public Places," American Sociological Review, vol. 56 (1991), pp. 101-16; Joe R. Feagin and Melvin P. Sikes, Living with Racism: The Black Middle-class Experience (Boston: Beacon, 1994); and Janet K. Swim, "African American College Students' Experiences with Everyday Racism: Characteristics of and Responses to These Incidents," Journal of Black Psychology, vol. 29 (2003), pp. 38-67.

(15.) Feagin and Sikes, op. cit.

(16.) Ibid.

(17.) John B. McConahay, Betty B. Hardee, and Valerie Batts, "Has Racism Declined In America? It Depends on Who Is Asking and What Is Asked," Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 25 (1981), pp. 563-79; and John F. Dovidio and Samuel L. Gaertner, "The Aversive Form of Racism," in Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism: Theory and Research, ed. J. F. Dovidio and S. L. Gaertner (Orlando: Academic Press, 1986), pp. 61-89.

(18.) Cynthia Willming, "Leisure-travel Behaviors of College-educated African Americans and Perceived Racial Discrimination" (unpublished dissertation, University of Florida, 2001).

(19.) A National Report Card on Discrimination in America, ed. M. Fix and M. A. Turner (Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 1998).

(20.) For example, see: Emily D. Noll and Susan E. Arnold, "Racial Differences in Tipping: Evidence in the Field," on pages 23-29, of this Cornell Quarterly; Michael Lynn, "Black-White Differences in Tipping of Various Service Providers," Journal of Applied Social Psychology (in press); and Michael Lynn and Clorice Thomas-Haysbert, "Ethnic Differences in Tipping: Evidence, Explanations and Implications," Journal of Applied Social Psychology (in press).

(21.) Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, "The Linguistics of Color-blind Racism: How to Talk Nasty about Blacks without Sounding 'Racist,'" Critical Sociology, vol. 28 (2002), pp. 41-64.

(22.) Robert Rosenthal and Donald B. Rubin, "Interpersonal Expectancy Effects: The First 345 Studies," Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 2 (1978), pp. 377-415; Mark Snyder, "On the Self-Perpetuating Nature of Social Stereotypes," in Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior, ed. D. L. Hamilton (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1981); Mark Chen and John A. Bargh, "Nonconscious Behavioral Confirmation Processes: The Self-Fulfilling Consequences of Automatic Stereotype Activation," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 33 (1997), pp. 541-60; and Lynn and Thomas-Haybert, loc. cit.

(23.) Snyder, op. cit.; and Chen and Bargh, op. cit.

(24.) Kristen Myers and Passion Williamson, "Race Talk: The Perpetuation of Racism through Private Discourse," Race and Society, vol. 4 (2001), pp. 3-26; van Dijk 1984; Teun Van Dijk, Communicating Racism (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1987); and Jeff Greenberg, S. L. Kirkland, and Tom Pyszczynski, "Some Theoretical Notions and Preliminary Research Concerning Derogatory Ethnic Labels," in Discourse and Discrimination, ed. G. Smitherman-Donaldson and T. van Dijk (Detroit, MI: Wayne State University, 1988), pp. 74-92.

(25.) See: Teun van Dijk, Prejudice and Discourse (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1984); and van Dijk (1987), op. cit.

(26.) Myers and Williamson, op. cit.

(27.) McConahay, Hardee, and Batts (1981, pp. 182-212); McConahay (1986); Dovidio and Gaertner (1986).

(28.) As explained to us by Joe R. Feagin. For example, see: McConahay, Hardee, and Batts, op. cit.; John B. McConahay, "Modern Racism, Ambivalence, and the Modern Racism Scale," in Dovidio and Gaertner, op. cit., pp. 91-125; Dovidio and Gaertner, op. cit.; Patricia G. Devine and Andrew J. Elliot, "Are Racial Stereotypes Really Fading? The Princeton Trilogy Revisited," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 21 (1998), pp. 1139-50; John F. Dovidio and Samuel L. Gaertner, "The Aversive Form of Racism," in Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings, ed. C. Stangor (Philadelphia: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis, 2000), pp. 61-89; Feagin et al., op. cit.; and Bonilla-Silva, op. cit.

(29.) See: Erving Goffman, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (Garden City: Doubleday Anchor, 1959); Erving Goffman, Relations in Public (New York: Basic, 1971); and Leslie Houts, "Back Stage Racial Events and White College Students" (unpublished manuscript, University of Florida, 2003).

(30.) Dovidio and Gaertner (1986, 2000), op. cit.

(31.) Houts, loc. cit.

(32.) Thomas F. Pettigrew and Joanne Martin. "Shaping the Organizational Context for Black-American Inclusion," Journal of Social Issues, vol. 43 (1987), pp. 41-78.

(33.) Gordon Allport, The Nature of Prejudice (Garden City: Doubleday Anchor, 1954); Feagin and Sikes, op. cit.; and Joe R. Feagin and Karyn D. McKinney, The Many Costs of Racism (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003).

(34.) Put simply, grounded theory refers to the process of building theory from the ground up--that is, systematically analyzing and categorizing qualitative data for the purpose of uncovering inherent trends and practices.

(35.) See: Joe R. Feagin, White Men on Race (Boston: Beacon, 2003).

(36.) Harry J. Holzer and Keith R. Ihlanfeldt, "Customer Discrimination and Employment Outcomes for Minority Workers," Institute for Research on Poverty Papers, pp. 1122-97 (1997), from http://edirc.repec.org/data/iruwius.html, as viewed July 1, 2003.

(37.) Ibid.

(38.) In a New York Times article, S. Greenhouse relays the story of Ian Schrager's agreement to pay a $1.08 million settlement after the EEOC accused his Mondrian Hotel in West Hollywood of racial discrimination for firing nine valets and bellhops, eight of them people of color. Schrager had written memos saying that he wanted a trendier group of workers and that the fired employees were "too ethnic." As one of the EEOC supervisory attorneys explained, "The problem with all this image stuff is it just reeks of marketing for this white-bread, Northern European, thin, wealthy, fashion-model look. We all can't be Anglo, athletic and young." See: S. Greenhouse, "Going for the Look, but Risking Discrimination," New York Times, July 13, 2003, p. 1.12.

(39.) Cited in: Myers and Williamson, op. cit.

(40.) The derogatory term moolie is derived from melanzane, Italian for eggplant and referring to eggplants' dark skin.

(41.) Greenberg, Kirkland, and Pyszczynski, op. cit.

(42.) Bonilla-Silva, op. cit.

(43.) See, for example: Noll and Arnold, on pages 23-29 of this Cornell Quarterly.

(44.) See: Lynn, loc. cit.; and Lynn and Thomas-Haysbert, loc. cit.

(45.) Rosenthal and Rubin, op. cit.; Snyder. op. cit.; Chen and Bargh, op. cit.

(46.) Dovidio and Gaertner, op. cit.

(47.) Bonilla-Silva, op. cit.

RELATED ARTICLE: Examples of Racism at Shoney's.

The accompanying article explains that restaurants typically have a public face that is nominally not racist, coupled with a private, often racist face. That was not the case with Shoney's. As detailed in the class action, Haynes v. Shoney's, the company's cofounder was overtly racist, as shown in the following description:

   [Ray Danner] ... spent most weekends flying to his restaurants
   across the country. His inspections were the stuff of legend-he
   was rumored to pitch in if the restaurant was busy,
   and he made time to speak to all the staff members. He also,
   according to the managers under his rule, made sure to let
   them know if there were too many blacks working in a particular
   restaurant. "Lighten the place up" was a favored euphemism
   for this policy. The chain's upper ranks instructed managers
   to cut back on black staff by sharply reducing their work
   hours, and promotions of black workers were all but forbidden.
   Managers were instructed to blacken the o in
   "Shoney's" on the application form if the job seeker was
   black. (9)

Another source added, "Danner would say that no one would want to eat at a restaurant where' a bunch of niggers' were working.... [Danner believed that] blacks should not be employed in any position where they would be seen by customers." (10)--D.D. and S.K.R.

Danielle Dirks (ddirks@soc.ufl.edu) and Stephen K. Rice (rice@ufl.edu) are graduate-student researchers at the University of Florida, Department of Sociology. The authors are indebted to Glenn Withiam, Alex Piquero, Joe R. Feagin, and Liv Newman for assistance in finalizing the drafts of this article. This article is based on a more comprehensive book chapter titled "'Dining While Black': Racial Rituals and the Black American Restaurant Experience," forthcoming in Race and Ethnicity--Across Time, Space, and Discipline, edited by Rodney Coates (Brill Publishing).