There's little middle ground on opinions about frugal-diner etiquette
By Michelle Singletary
WASHINGTON — It seems a lot of people are experiencing frugal-diner fatigue.
That's when a restaurant meal turns into an embarrassing battle over the bill.
I had no idea I would initiate an avalanche of mail by responding to one reader's complaints about a penny-pinching co-worker who, as it turns out, was really being miserly and whose shenanigans to get out of paying his fair share caused a lot of ill will.
To get around the haggling over who should pay, many people have decided that splitting the bill equally is the only way to go. Here's a sampling of what equal splitters had to say:
But there's another side:
In "Emily Post's Etiquette," a comprehensive guide to manners, author Peggy Post says splitting the bill can be approached in two ways, both of which are socially acceptable.
"First, you each pay only for what you ordered; second you split the bill in equal shares," she writes.
Post says although the latter is preferred by many because it's simpler, it's OK if you don't want to split the tab equally. It's fine if you don't want to subsidize what others ate if, for example, they had a bottle of wine when you had none.
I think it's ludicrous to conclude that people should stop dining out in groups because they're budget conscious. The solution is to practice some common sense and sensitivity.
Don't be afraid to ask for a separate check, Post advises. "Just make sure to ask before ordering, for both your fellow diners' and the server's sake," Post writes. Here's the polite way to do it she suggests: "Hope nobody minds, but I'm going to have to ask for a separate bill tonight."
Come on, people. If we can make microchips to carry millions of bits of information, it's possible to dine in groups and pay the bill without a lot of financial drama.
