To not order what I want to eat when a group meal out

[rookiemere]

I've been stewing on this slightly since Friday.

Went out with a group of ex work friends - about 12 of us - to a well known mid priced chain restaurant. We've been there before, but usually in smaller numbers, and it worked out well. Everyone had pizza/pasta, we shared some appetizers and split bill equally.

This time I assumed the format would be the same. Someone at my end suggested sharing some bready things - I'm not a great lover of loads of bread followed by pasta - but in these situations I always try to go with the flow, so I said sure.

All good except when the food arrived - at the other end 3 of the blokes had ordered expensive starters. Then when the main courses arrived rather than ordering the mid range meals they had the expensive meat options, oh and desserts as well.

To be fair when the bill came one of them suggested putting in more because of what they had - but it was only a couple of quid more rather than actually reflecting the cost differential in their meals. Working it out I paid a few quid more than it what it should have been even with tip and drinks included, but not hugely out of pocket.

I guess the reason I'm posting this is that actually I would have preferred having the seafood starter rather than the stodgy bread myself and would have been happy to pay the cost difference, but have always been brought up to order mid-range in a group situation. AIBU?

I think the ratio of people who would actually have the nerve to plead poverty (even if true), to the people who will be too proud to make a fuss even if they can't really afford the "split", would be about 1:100!

I used to be pretty relaxed about splitting the bill, until late last year when I went out with a group of 3 other friends. Me and the other woman were pg so didn't have huge bloodied steaks or alcohol, the other two men of course had the full shebang, including multiple whiskies.

We both paid well, well over the odds for our modest meals. Never again. And for what it's worth, if I ever have something expensive, I always pay the extra. I couldn't fucking believe that my two friends were seemingly oblivious we'd subsidised a piss up for them. Lesson learnt.

If you tend to eat/drink little or are watching the budget, I think that making sure you have cash in £5/£10/£20s , keeping a rough idea what your share of the consumption comes to, and deciding whether to split the bill or say 'this covers mine' when you see how much you're going to be subsidising the gluttons, is the best approach. It's hard for the tightwads (who are the ones expecting subsidy BTW, not the ones doing the subsidising) to claim that it's your moral duty to subsidise their consumption.

Only three ways to deal with it:

• If you're ok for cash but don't like being ripped off, order 'up' instead of mid level and enjoy yourself to the full

• If you're broke or not that hungry, order 'down' and be politely assertive that you're just paying for your own

• if some of the group (yes, it's usually men) seem blithely unaware of how unfair splitting the bill would be , tell them. Even if it's not you who's affected. One day it will be, so speak up now. It helps to not be embarrassed to be specific: say 'But you had a bottle of wine and two extra courses so it's not right you pay the same' rather than whispering 'er, I think you might need to put more in?' If they're going to kick off, they will regardless, so you may as well sound assertive about it.

It is best to just order what you want, and then pay for it IMO

(Like the one bloke who did this)

IME blokes order in happy-go-lucky fashion when out for a meal, whereas groups of women can agonise more about how to spend as little as possible. Women are also much more likely to order tap water for this reason. And when I am out with a group of women, they/we tend to tip less (my pet hate!).

Well, that is just my experience, not a general "rule".

Decency should mean that people should have at least a vague awareness of their own consumption

I think some posts on here sadly prove that decency doesn't come into it, and often the converse is true, people are acutely aware of their own consumption and go out of their way to get other people to sub them. Maybe thinking "safety in number", if there are loads of people putting money in a pile, by sleight of hand, it will all get lost in the mêlée.

DH and I have often exchanged (and cringed) at the plethora (word of the day) of examples of tight-waddery that goes on in social situations.

Hoggle I can't believe understand how people sit there and let themselves be fleeced.

Durstarr I kicked myself the whole way home, believe me

And when I am out with a group of women, they/we tend to tip less (my pet hate!)

Yes I've been in that situation too.

This reminds me of a meal my friends and I had a few years ago... We had taken to going out (usually drinking, but this time it was eating) with cash only, leaving cards at home so as not to be tempted to spend extra when drunk worked really well actually don't know why I stopped doing it We lived/drank/ate in the same small town so no need for emergency cash for taxis etc. Anyway, five of us went out for a meal and the individual orders varied from one main course (less than £10) and tap water, to smoked salmon starter, posh surf and turf main, pudding, port and loads of wine. When the bill came my friend who'd had the salmon, surf and turf, port etc, suggested we split it equally. I could see that my friend who only had a main and water felt uncomfortable so I suggested we all put in for what we actually had. Everyone was happy, except surf and turf friend...turns out she had only brought £30 cash with her (her main course alone was over £25!) and her 3 courses, port and wine totalled over £60!!

I used to work with a woman who would order half the menu, have a couple of cocktails and wine, and at the end say sweetly 'Oh, shall we split the bill?'. She was very clearly doing this to ensure she got her money's worth - she was one of the tightest people I've ever met. The worst time - and it was 20 years ago now - another colleague and I ended up subsidising her to the tune of £10 each. That was a lot of money to us. The next time I ate out with her, I asked her to pay for what she had eaten and drunk, and she ignored me. After that I never ate out with her again.

So, that was then. Nowadays I order what I want from the menu, keep a tally in my head and put in the cost of my food and drink plus £5. If anyone has any complaints about this, I haven't heard them ; )

I only split the bill with certain friends I know wont take advantage.
I'm vegetarian and don't drink alcohol, there's no way I'm subsidising anyone else's meal and booze. I couldn't care less if people think I'm tight.

Babyganoush
That's because women often have less money than men.
I don't think not tipping due to lack of money is wrong.

I never split the bill as I have limited income and cannot afford to subsidise someone else's steak or bottle of red. I just put in what mine cost plus a tip and that's it - then take a long loo break while it dawsns on those who ordered the most expensive meal on the menu that they have to pay for it!! lol!

Once I even left saying I had to be home for a certain time as they were arguing - nobody had said upfront to share the bill.

meant to add the next day at work several people said they wished they had done the same and from then on we always paid for ourselves and suprise suprise the steak and bottle of red orderers ordered pasta and coke!! lol!

Paying for meals individually is a very German thing tomdo, and is very fiddly and lengthy, but

A) does stop arguments like these and
B) seems a lot fairer to all concerned

Unless you're splitting bottles of wine and trying to work out the cost I don't understand how it's time consuming . When I order I keep a running total of what I'm buying, round up and then put in the required amount - and the rounding up takes care of the tip. It's only time consuming if people are just ordering willy nilly off the menu, not looking at the prices and then expecting the bill to be split (aka expecting others to subsidise them)

I'm quite bolshy about this kind of thing now, having been stiffed a few times in group meals. I now say at the outset that I don't care how the rest of them are dealing with the bill, but I will be paying for my own - I have glasses of wine, rather than sharing a bottle, then I know exactly how much my share is. I'm always highly unlikely to order the lobster/steak/dessert/malbec, so my share is likely to be cheaper than others anyway.

I don't care if it makes me seem mean tbh - I can't afford to go out for meals very often, and if I'm subsidising other people's food, I can go less often.

I hate splitting the bill. Once there was a big group of us. When the bill came it was decided the non alcohol drinkers should pay quite a bit less than everyone else. They were more than happy with this and it sounded fair enough in principle.

However, when I mentioned that I only had 2 courses and one glass of wine whilst they had 3 courses plus sides I was ignored. Ended up paying way more than I should've. So annoying.

Unless you're splitting bottles of wine and trying to work out the cost I don't understand how it's time consuming

Well sharing wine is really common so that complication is there from the start. And people just aren't very good at doing the mental calculations needed to tot up their personal total.

When I've been in an 'everyone pays for what they ordered' scenario there's often a discrepancy between the bill and the money everyone has put in which results in either a lengthy post-mortem, the server getting a generous tip (best case scenario) or someone just stumping up to end a deadlock in which everyone thinks they've paid what was due and yet the total amount accumulated falls short of the bill.

I'm gluten intolerant so always order what I can eat and if it's more expensive either pay separately or chip in enough to more than cover the extra cost and tip, I think that is good etiquette. It's important to remember that some people may be struggling financially and we shouldn't ruin an evening out for them by putting them in a difficult situation with an unfair bill. Should get agreement about how to split the bill before going.

Anytime I have been to a group meal, it is agreed beforehand, to have a set menu which has an agreed cost. Drinks are separate and paid for individually. No arguments and nobody feels hard done by. If it's an occasion, sometimes we all chip in to pay for the person (birthday). That arrangement seems to work better in a friends get together, rather than a work scenario. Mainly because it was always demanded, if it was someone "in the click", everyone had to chip in, but if it was anyone else, there was no such assumption/demand made. By coincidence (a friend was fed up with all the extra expenses on nights out), I found that this arrangement seems to be a similar scenario in other work places too.

I've never been in that situation Bubbin - it's incredibly easy to order glasses of wine or other drinks, and just keep a mental tab of what you're ordering. It seems to be the ones who don't pay attention to what they're ordering (with the expectation that everyone else will subsidise them) who find it difficult to 'remember' what they had. The bill at the end always helps if a reminder is needed.

I would always be clear with all in the party in advance about what is happening with the bill. I eat out often and our group find it easy to work out what we've each had but I am happy to bill split if we have been eating and drinking roughly equal amounts.

I don't think not tipping due to lack of money is wrong.

I do. If you can't afford to tip, don't eat there.

I used to waitress in my school and student days. Tipping was a nice extra, not an expectation. If people couldn't tip because they couldn't afford it then I wouldn't have expected them to eat elsewhere - I would have been out of a job if we lost customers.