Mannersisms...

Posted by: jimhogan

Mannersisms... - 02/01/2006 19:07

This is a little exercise in situational ethics related to restaurants.

Background: A pretty popular, good-sized fish restaurant. You often have to sign up and wait for a table, but they have a long curved bar with nice chairs (let's say 26 of them and call them A through Z) and you can just sit down there if seats are available.

Couple #1 comes in on the early side for lunch and almost all the bar seats are empty. They pick seats B and C. They could have had a table without much wait, but they like the bar because the service is generally better -- and it's now smoke free. They don't sit in seat A because it is at the end right next to a spot where the wait staff come and go.

An hour later, Couple #1 is just finishing their entree and is thinking about asking for the dessert menu. Couple #2 comes in and is told that there is a one-hour wait for a table. They take a look around the bar and see that there are two seats available - A and D.

You are couple #2. How do you proceed?

(edit: I see Bitt and Phil's responses and realized that I should have said in the OP that I am going to wait a bit to respond to responses -- let some opinion collect a bit -- as I have a few more questions that really depend on initial responses...)
Posted by: CrackersMcCheese

Re: Mannersisms... - 02/01/2006 19:23

If its obvious they are about to leave (i.e I can see they are nearly finished) I'd wait near the door for them to leave so I could grab their seats. I'd not ask them to move so I could have A&B nor would I stand over them!
Posted by: wfaulk

Re: Mannersisms... - 02/01/2006 19:40

I don't think that it's unreasonable to ask them to move down. If Seat A is a well-known bad seat, then having them move away from it would be more appropriate.

I don't think I'd do it.

Then again, if most of the seats were open when they sat down, they shouldn't have left a one-person gap to begin with. Right after we teach people which side of the sidewalk to walk on and which door to open, we need to teach them some basic tenets of dynamic storage allocation.
Posted by: CrackersMcCheese

Re: Mannersisms... - 02/01/2006 19:43

I say I wouldn't ask them to move but if they looked up and we made eye contact it might happen. I'd not feel comfortable doing it though. Making them move their jackets, bags, drinks etc is something I'd not like doing. If they offered though I'd accept.

Edited: 'Their' not 'They're'.
Posted by: CrackersMcCheese

Re: Mannersisms... - 02/01/2006 19:50

Its like Urinal Etiquette
Posted by: lectric

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 00:43

I'd have asked with little hesitation. In fact, I'd appreciate someone asking ME to move over. I would feel like an ass if I looked up and there was a couple standing simply because they were too timid to make their presence known.
Posted by: msaeger

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 02:16

The first time I read your reply I was thinking you were responding to the Urinal Etiquette thing
Posted by: lectric

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 03:38

Hehehe, no no no. If I'm in a head they're just going to have to wait. I', not scooting over. Or hurrying up.
Posted by: sein

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 15:20

In this particular case, I wouldn't think of asking them to move over. I am pretty strict about mannerisms over food. No phones, no TV, no moving people about once they've started. No way I'm gonna interrupt their evening.

But then again, suppose you flipped the question around, and I was part of couple "A". I'd move over straight away if I saw the restaurant was full and people waiting could sit in the space I'm unnessesarily (sp?) taking up.

I'd say the restaurant is a special case. In the Cinema or on the Underground, I'll ask people to move up if I want them to without much bother.
Posted by: g_attrill

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 16:03

I would sit in A, tell the girlfriend/wife or whatever to sit in D and would conduct a conversation through B and C until they got the message. This assumes your partner is willing, otherwise they can just come "visit" between courses.

Gareth
Posted by: peter

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 16:13

I guess it depends a bit on how close the bar seats are together. If they're so close that having an empty one between groups is necessary for not being on top of each other, then a bar with only seats A and D empty is at maximum capacity and you'd need to wait for a table. It is a bit like the urinal problem, or like the SEPTA problem (SEPTA trains have a double and a triple seat in each row AB_CDE, and the natural fill order is aecbd).

Peter
Posted by: CrackersMcCheese

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 16:45

Quote:
conduct a conversation through B and C until they got the message.


See I'd find that really rude if I were the BC couple and make me less likely to move! Its not something I would do. Theres not 2 seats together so live with it and wait. Its not in me to harrass someone into moving.
Posted by: Dignan

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 17:50

I don't find what they did particularly rude. And Bitt, you're assuming that the most common configuration of people sitting at the bar is two people. I don't think I've ever eaten at a bar with another person. I think couple 1 could reasonably expect a single person to sit in seat A.

Along the same lines, what if there's a single person in seat E? That person could move to A, but it's not likely.

I would definitely wait for that couple to leave. The amount of time to eat dessert would be far less than an hour wait (which I'm completely used to in my area), and I think it's unlikely that the couple would sit at a bar for a long conversation afterwards.

Anyway, there are much more annoying practices from restaurant patrons. I've been in a party of four at a crowded restaurant with a long wait. Almost all the tables are four-person booths. I'm standing with my party by a freezing cold entrance, and 12 feet away there's two people occupying a booth who have clearly finished their desserts a long while ago and are now just chatting away. I find that rude.

Similarly, my favorite breakfast place has extremely busy weekend mornings. Nearly every week I'll see someone who obviously came in before the rush, but has decided that he has every right to sit alone in his four-person window booth and read the paper and have cup after cup of cofee, even though there's a line out the door, and will do this until the lunch period starts. Will they move to one of the two-person booths which are essentially for one person? Nope.

Damn, why'd you start me on a rant?
Posted by: ithoughti

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 18:00

it's at a bar, so slightly different (i.e more relaxed) rules apply.

I think that if I really wanted to sit at the bar I would ask the couple if they would mind moving down to C and D, if they don't want to, then fine.

If I don't care too much about sitting at the bar, then I wait.
Posted by: matthew_k

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 18:06

Just the other night my girlfriend and I were sitting down at the bar in a restaurant with four seats open. Prefering to not sit next to anyone, we asked the bartender, who assured us that it was fine. Soon after we sat down, the party to our right left, and it wasn't an issue. The bartender has a much better idea of the eb and flow of the place, so they're a good person to ask.

I personally wouldn't ask people to move. Having a space between parties at a bar isn't unreasonable if the place isn't burssting out the seams with people. If as you sit down you insist on monopolizing extra seats that other people would like to use right then, you're being a jerk. If you're the only party approaching the bar at that point, I don't see a problem with it.

Perhaps we're all ignoreing the real reason why bars serve food in restaraunts: the dinner for one crowd. And with all this moving about, you seem to be filling up their spaces. Leave 'em for the lonely people so they've got somewhere to eat.

Matthew
Posted by: sein

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 18:31

Quote:
I would sit in A, tell the girlfriend/wife or whatever to sit in D and would conduct a conversation through B and C until they got the message. This assumes your partner is willing, otherwise they can just come "visit" between courses.


If I was B/C, I'd kick your ass if you did that. Why would you do that instead of just asking?
Posted by: Robotic

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 18:51

We are talking about a bar, even if it is at a nice restaurant.
I wouldn't have any issues with asking if B/C could shift down. It's more informal at the bar, anyway.
They don't both have to move- B could take D and C stays seated. That's just my engineering brain talking- in reality I think it's more likely that they'd both move.

If I wanted them to make the offer, I'd seat my gal at A and stand next to her while we ordered drinks. This gives them the option to move away from the not-so-nice end of the bar.
If I didn't want to push the issue and they didn't make the offer, I'd rely on my charm and charisma to make the hour-long-wait-for-a-table go by in an instant.
Posted by: matthew_k

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 18:55

While we're talking about a bar, the initial premis implied eating at the bar. If everyone's just ordering drinks, it's probably not much for people to move down. If everyone's ordering food and there for the long haul, it's a bigger disturbance.

Matthew
Posted by: tman

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 18:59

Quote:
Quote:
I would sit in A, tell the girlfriend/wife or whatever to sit in D and would conduct a conversation through B and C until they got the message. This assumes your partner is willing, otherwise they can just come "visit" between courses.


If I was B/C, I'd kick your ass if you did that. Why would you do that instead of just asking?

Yeah. I'd make a point on not moving if somebody did that. Ask me politely or with good humour and I'll probably move. Do an arsehole stunt like that and I'll tell you to go to hell.
Posted by: Robotic

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 20:30

Quote:
If everyone's ordering food and there for the long haul, it's a bigger disturbance.

Matthew

True- I assumed that B/C were eating (although the outline proposes that they are finished with their entres and are, possibly, headed for dessert) and that we would also eat (whether at the bar or at a table).
There's a subtle timing issue here that I didn't catch the first time around...
The wait for a table is about an hour. The wait for the couple at B/C to leave is likely less than that.
The wait for my dinner while sitting at the bar is likely as long as the wait for the couple at B/C to finish their restaurant visit.

So, I don't think it would be such an imposition (as far as the limited space available is concerned) to (however you got there) be seated at A/B and have a drink and order food.
I'm supposing that the original couple wouldn't mind shifting down a seat after their entre plates are removed and allowing us to order drinks and an appetizer while they enjoy their dessert. By the time they are ready to leave, our entres will arrive.
This help ease the image of four people crammed at the bar with knives and forks in hand and a full meal in front of everyone.

As long as everyone is congenial and genuine, the described situation shouldn't be improper in any way, shape, or form.
My $0.02

It's interesting to see the differences of opinion. Are these culturally based? Probably.
I've lived most of my life in California- which is no haven for top-notch manners. The Bay Area is not without regal flair, however.
The initial post doesn't say where the restaurant is.
I may have pause when confronted with this situation in a place other than my own 'stomping grounds'.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 21:36

A closed mouth doesn't get fed. If they don't want to move (for whatever reason) then they can simply say so. It's not impolite to ask, but it would be impolite and inconsiderate for them not to move down one seat. I think not asking a simple and reasonable thing like that indicates a fear of confrontation. If they don't want to move then they're either rude or have a good reason for it. I say give them a chance to be polite and move over for you.
Posted by: CrackersMcCheese

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 21:38

Quote:
indicates a fear of confrontation


I'd not say confrontation. More like not wanting to inconvenience the people sitting there and have them move all their things. I'd rather just wait till they're finished. Maybe its just me
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 21:46

Good point. But I think they're inconveniencing other people by leaving two single seats, even if they don't realize it, which is why I think asking politely will just make them realize the situation.
Posted by: lectric

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 22:34

ACtually, I agree... More than likely they have no idea that someone is waiting for a seat. If they were obviously avoiding eye contact, they're just being rude, and I have no qualms with pointing it out.

Now, since they ARE at a bar, the odds are fairly good that they WILL have drinks after. At least, around here that's the case. In this case, it may be 2-3 hours before they decide to take their conversation elsewhere. Really, it just depends on the bar.
Posted by: PaulWay

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 22:57

I think we've all forgotten one thing here: the restaurant itself.

What I (or, more likely, my partner, since she's more decisive in these situations) would do would be to hail a waiter and ask them to ask the person/people to move. Especially in the cases you state, Dignan, the restaurant has an interest in getting as many people to eat (and pay) as possible. They're going to be a lot more diplomatic and yet forceful about it. They're also the ones in authority - the person can't really refuse a staff member asking them to move, whereas they can refuse you. And it's also hard for the staff member to come back to you and say "Sorry, but the ignorant boor over there doesn't want to move". If necessary the staff can sweeten the deal for the other person/people, knowing that they'll get more money in the long run.

And if you're in the USA, tip the waiter a bit more afterward to show that you appreciate it.

Have fun,

Paul
Posted by: g_attrill

Re: Mannersisms... - 03/01/2006 23:13

Quote:
If I was B/C, I'd kick your ass if you did that. Why would you do that instead of just asking?


Whoops, I was only joking, think my humour is a bit dry for some people's tastes!

Gareth
Posted by: JBjorgen

Re: Mannersisms... - 04/01/2006 03:18

Quote:
You are couple #2. How do you proceed?


I take my business to a restaurant that can seat me in a reasonable amount of time. Seriously. I don't care how good the food is, I rarely wait longer than 20-30 min.

Come to think of it, last time JeffS and I met for dinner, we walked across the street to a different restaurant rather than wait that long.
Posted by: tman

Re: Mannersisms... - 04/01/2006 05:08

Quote:
Whoops, I was only joking, think my humour is a bit dry for some people's tastes!

Admit it. You'd be throwing bits of food between A/D
Posted by: jimhogan

Re: Mannersisms... - 05/01/2006 01:26

Can't think of where best to post this, so I'll respond to myself.

(I am gratified, I must say, by the many responses)

Here's question #2:

Regardless of how you responded, put yourself again in the role of couple #2, but instead of Couple #1 occupying B and C, there is a single person occupying seat B, and A and C are vacant.

Does this change your earlier-stated approach in any way? If so, how?
Posted by: JeffS

Re: Mannersisms... - 05/01/2006 02:51

Quote:
Come to think of it, last time JeffS and I met for dinner, we walked across the street to a different restaurant rather than wait that long.
Not sure it was a good move, though- I remember the food being pretty terrible

Personally I go with the "sit the gf/wife at the bar and stand next to her and order a drink" option. If they want to move they can- otherwise we'll just wait it out and get a table if it comes open first. I don't think they are under any compulsion to move, nor do I really think they are being rude- it is a bar after all.

Honestly, though, I only ever go over to the bar to eat if I can see two open seats together. If I don't then we just go find someplace where we won't have to wait.

One question- how do you know that all of the seats were open originally?
Posted by: canuckInOR

Re: Mannersisms... - 06/01/2006 02:51

Quote:
One question- how do you know that all of the seats were open originally?

This is a great question. I parked my truck over the lines (taking up 1 1/3 spots) at the bank once. When I came out of the bank, some guy started lambasting me about how rude I was, and blah, blah, blah. He apologized quite profusely after I mentioned the truck that had been in the (now empty) spot to the left which was poorly parked, and had various construction implements hanging over the side. He made an assumption that I'd just rolled in, and parked willy-nilly, when that wasn't the case, at all (and he didn't bother to ask, first).

Many of the responses here seem to have made the same mistake, because they know the background. Couple #2 can't make the assumption that couple #1 is responsible for leaving those one-person gaps. I've seen enough odd-numbered dinner groups, and been in far too many single-person dinner groups that I'd never think couple #1 was rude for leaving empty chairs at a bar.

Speaking of assumptions, I found all the replies quite interesting. Many of them made it sound as though the bar was the sort of bar found in a drinking establishment, or pub -- hence a bunch of talk about hanging out for drinks. My first thought, since Jim mentioned fish, was a sushi place, and I had a quite different idea about the propriety of asking couple #1 to move. Were it a simple matter of someone hopping off a stool, and moving over (and really, only one person in couple 1 would have to move), I'd be more inclined to ask someone to shift over. However, for something like a sushi bar, where the patrons are seated in chairs, I'd be much less willing to interrupt.