update re: you pay and we'll choose the food

[Slartibartfast]

I'm going to disagree with DottyG - it sounds like Wetblanket really should go to this, if only to further her career and not be TOO obvious she doesn't like these people.  And the things I would insist on fighting back about:

1)  You "NEED" to pay $15 each, when Wetblanket has stated there is no way the whole meal would cost that much.

2)  You "NEED" to pay your money weeks ahead of time.

3)  They "CAN'T" get the one thing Wetblanket wants, EVEN IF she is paying $15.  You would think that $15 would cover at least one appertizer per person at the table, so they should be able to get something she plans to eat the majority of, even if nobody else wants it!

It sounds to me like a lot of people are ready to jump to the defense of the organizers, but it ends up being a "sometimes" argument.  Just like ones we've seen on here before, when a poster remarks on how a rude person was talking on the phone during a movie, and other posters jump in with "But sometimes it's a really important call, like they could be a doctor and have to run to the hospital to save a child's life!"  Maybe, but probably not - and the OP would have heard the conversation.  Here, Wetblanket has checked with the pub, and it sounds like she has eaten there before - so the "Sometimes restaurants only take one check for groups" or "Sometimes it's lots of work organizing a group like this" don't fly.

If it were me, I would definitely follow the advice posters gave Wetblanket earlier - come (because the job basically requires it), but don't get involved with these "organizers."  Pay for your own food when you're there, and tip 50% if you feel you're inconveniencing the server that much.  But there should be obligation to fund the pockets of these "organizing" employees who don't seem to account for the money they collect.

[gjcva1]

okay, wetblanket, i've never considered you the bad guy in this, but i have some additional thoughts here:

1) it might look easy, but i've been one of those organizers, and it's a heck of a lot of work.  i don't know how long you've worked for this company, but it sounds to me like they've done this for a long time, almost by default.  and THEY probably don't enjoy it either, because they know that someone will be unhappy with whatever they decide to do.

2) is the office completely closing for this two hour party?  if not, and someone will have to stay back, can you volunteer to cover the phones and let the receptionist go to the party?  you can always say that she's worked hard too, and you'd like her to attend the party.  then you can forget the entire thing, AND be seen as a good guy.

3) if you really hate the people you work with so very much (i thought about using the capital letters and periods that you did, but didn't want to seem snarky), how soon will you be looking for a new job?  because, really, life is too short to work with people that you HATE.

i'm sorry that you didn't get the answers that you wanted.  that's the risk you run when you post a question here, as we're a pretty outspoken bunch with varied life and work experiences.  you will get some support, you will get some dissent.  we figure that if you ask a question, we'll answer honestly.  if you don't want an honest answer, don't ask the question.

[DottyG]

I'm going to disagree with DottyG - it sounds like Wetblanket really should go to this, if only to further her career and not be TOO obvious she doesn't like these people.

I see your point.  And, I do agree that there are times when (to use the phrase that no one likes, but it's still true in the workplace - whether we like it or not! ) you actually do have to "suck it up" and do something you don't like in order to show you're a teamplayer or to make yourself look good or whatever.  Goodness knows we've all had to do something along the line that we weren't happy about but that our boss needed us to do or made us look like we're a good member of the company or whatever.

My purpose in saying that she shouldn't go is just that she does seem more than a little overwrought about the whole thing.  And, that attitude (along with the REALLY REALLY HATE THEM thoughts) are going to show.  Big time.  And, that's not going to make her look good.  In this case, it appears that not going (and showing the emotions she's having towards these people) might almost be better than just going for the "looks" of it.  See what I mean?

If she's this upset about the whole affair, it's going to harm her, and her career, more to go than to not go.

Editing to correct a word

[DottyG]

3) if you really hate the people you work with so very much (i thought about using the capital letters and periods that you did, but didn't want to seem snarky), how soon will you be looking for a new job?  because, really, life is too short to work with people that you HATE.

I agree with this completely.  It sounds as if a new job in a fresh environment is way past due.

And, for the record, I don't consider wetb to be a "bad guy" here.  Just wanted her to see if she could take anything she's hearing (even though it's upsetting to her to hear) with a clear head and maybe have a nugget of truth in there somewhere.  In amongst these posts, maybe she's able to find something that helps her in the future?

[gjcva1]

3) if you really hate the people you work with so very much (i thought about using the capital letters and periods that you did, but didn't want to seem snarky), how soon will you be looking for a new job?  because, really, life is too short to work with people that you HATE.

I agree with this completely.  It sounds as if a new job in a fresh environment is way past due.

And, for the record, I don't consider wetb to be a "bad guy" here.  Just wanted her to see if she could take anything she's hearing (even though it's upsetting to her to hear) with a clear head and maybe have a nugget of truth in there somewhere.  In amongst these posts, maybe she's able to find something that helps her in the future?

thank you Dottie, you made the same point that i did.  i actually feel a great deal of empathy with wetb.  it happens. and when you feel this extreme, it's time to look for something else. 

[magicdomino]

Could the pub have a separate party menu, with larger platters?  The bar where my office party is being held has a separate catering menu priced per number of people.

I'm having a little trouble being sympathetic here.  My office Christmas party usually runs about $30 (including an open bar for an hour or two), and I've never had any say about the choice of food or venue.  The organizers figure that one out (and having organized Christmas parties in the past, I happlily let them have the headaches).  I haven't gone in the last couple of years because the party has been starting at 6:00 pm when I leave work at 5:00 and, well, $30 is a lot to pay for a glass of wine and a handful of hor d'oeves.

[behindbj]

It sounds to me like a lot of people are ready to jump to the defense of the organizers, but it ends up being a "sometimes" argument.  Just like ones we've seen on here before, when a poster remarks on how a rude person was talking on the phone during a movie, and other posters jump in with "But sometimes it's a really important call, like they could be a doctor and have to run to the hospital to save a child's life!"  Maybe, but probably not - and the OP would have heard the conversation.  Here, Wetblanket has checked with the pub, and it sounds like she has eaten there before - so the "Sometimes restaurants only take one check for groups" or "Sometimes it's lots of work organizing a group like this" don't fly.

Actually, no.  This is not a "sometimes" argument - at least not from me.  "Sometimes" I need more facts than what an OP is telling me.

We only know what the OP tells us - what we don't know is what questions were asked to generate the answers she received.  Generally speaking, places DO give separate checks, even for large dining groups - but maybe not for parties at holiday time.  Happens here, anyway - YMMV.  And, to be blunt, the way that answer has been phrased in response to what other people are suggesting (each word emphasized with its own period, etc) looks to me like the OP is stomping her little feet instead of actually talking to folks.  Stomping her feet would get her about thisfar with me.   

Since it is not a private-room affair, she could just show up and order her own food.  If someone is rude enough to comment, she could just say she wasn't sure she would be there (or that she couldn't eat any of the food).

And what I don't see (and I could have missed it) is where the OP went to the people organizing and said that she would like to come but would prefer to pay at the establishment (once this is arranged with the establishment).  All I see is a bunch of complaining but no productive discussion. 

Go or don't.  This, to me, is one of those "skin off my nose" issues - for me (and I have been in situations like this), going would most likely not be any skin off my nose.

Now, the OP hating her co-workers - that's another issue altogether.  And it may also be what's actually driving this issue.

behindbj

[Secret]

"I checked out the pub's menu and what the organizers are planning to order for us.  Get this - the total for the food order, plus tax and tip, should come to $131.  So what do they need $210 for?  Argh!"

I think this is part of the question.  Sure 15 dollars doesn't seem like much for an afternoon party, but I'd like to know where my money is going.  Will the organizers be buying small gifts for everyone? Or are they pocketing the money, because they put so much effort into it. 

I work hard for my money and like the OP, I would be making a mountain out of a molehill for that simple reason.  I"m with the OP here

[wetblanket]

I don't think I am overwrought.  

I've continued posting so as to clarify the situation.  E.g. some responses were along the lines of "Maybe the organizers have to do it this way because there's a local ordinance about separate checks in restaurants after Dec. 15", so I posted again to say no, that's not the case here.

Also, I find that some posters kind of cherry-pick which facts they want to address.  E.g.  "It's only $15, who cares?" without noting that the "low price" of $15 each is weirdly high for what would be a reasonable amount of food, so either we are going to get way too much food, or something else is planned for the group's money.  I personally think there is an etiquette problem with that, and I have found it odd that some posters think it's no biggie.

I'm not sure what to make of posters who "fill in the blanks" by assuming the worst of me while giving the organizers the benefit of the doubt.

Anyway, I've been able to wriggle my way out of this thing in a such a way that I have the option to go without forking out in advance to people I don't like and do not trust.

[wetblanket]

"I checked out the pub's menu and what the organizers are planning to order for us.  Get this - the total for the food order, plus tax and tip, should come to $131.  So what do they need $210 for?  Argh!"

I think this is part of the question.  Sure 15 dollars doesn't seem like much for an afternoon party, but I'd like to know where my money is going.  Will the organizers be buying small gifts for everyone? Or are they pocketing the money, because they put so much effort into it. 

I work hard for my money and like the OP, I would be making a mountain out of a molehill for that simple reason.  I"m with the OP here

Thanks kellymarie.   

[Deetee]

This is interesting for me because I just had a conversation with a friend/coworker who is organising a rather complicated social event in a few weeks for some close friends.

 He is quite upset because he has put a lot of time and effort into accomadating everyone and putting together a menu and organising where and when everything will be held. Now one person is complaining and hijacking and wanting to show up for only part of it. His feeling was he was "hosting" (with effort and organisation-costs are shared) and when I asked him outright whether he wanted this girl (a good friend) to come for part of the event or not at all. He was very clear. He didn't want her to come unless she was coming for the entire event (as he planned it).

I know this is a different situation in some respects, but watching this guy talking about how rude and annoying it was to not accept the invitation as specified really cemented my feelings on this.

Go Cheerfully

or

Decline Gracefully

Anything else is rude.

[Slartibartfast]

Go Cheerfully

or

Decline Gracefully

Anything else is rude.

I really don't think that's always the case.  I'm sure we've all known "organizers" who are in it for the power trip - and saying "the company will provide dinner only if you sit in a kiddie pool full of jell-o while the boss reads bad poetry at you because that's what I planned and it's rude to leave early" is not about being rude, it's about feeding their ego.  If it's possible to leave the event early (or get your own meal separate, or make alternate plans for alcohol consumption, or whatever) without putting more work on the organizers or the facility staff or the co-workers, I don't see how it could be rude to do so.  Not to judge what your friend is feeling, Deetee, but part of organizing an event is finding a way to accomodate those who need to leave early (within reason) or have other special needs or requests.  If one person leaving early "hijacking" the event, he should try to find a way to make her exit less obtrusive - not to just un-invite her instead.

[heathert]

I know I'm new, but maybe Wet should tell the organizer she will go to the pub on her own, not as part of the party and she plans to get her own food there? If that's not a possibility, maybe Wet should make an extra effort to schmooze with the boss, maybe invite them out for a drink or a meal without the rest of the gang.  Then you'll get their undivided attention and networking prospects to boot.

I have a feeling the party has already happened since Wet hasn't posted on it lately...

Heather

[kareng57]

I have a question for the OP:

Is the objection you have to your request for a certain food due to reason like allergy, being a vegetarian, religious reasons or something like that?  I could understand that, but honestly, my perception of the "request" is just that you want to have input on the festivities....

I see your point but in this case there really isn't that much work involved.  There is no need for them to pre-order the food.  There is no minimum amount of $$ set by the pub.  The pub can do separate checks. 

Having been a server, I know how hard it is to keep separate checks for that many people who are mingling and moving seats constantly.  Eventually, someone skips out on a check and the organizers are left holding the bag.  Not to mention there is the tipping issue involved with having individual checks.  Perhaps the pub has dealt with this too and suggested this format to the organizers.  If I were the pub management, I surely would.  As to it being unneccessary, that is your opinion, which may not be shared by the organizers.  As you are not one of said organizers, it is not your call as to what is neccessary or not.

I don't think this is a case of them imposing their choises and you footing the bill for it.  It really sounds like a control issue to me.  Having said that, either go and contribute, or don't.  It's really that simple.  If you hate these people so much, then why do you care so much about what they do?

Isn't it possible that they're also factoring in the gratuity in the cost?  I've never been a server but I've heard that most dislike serving large groups and that's often one of the reasons - often people tip minimally in large groups.  So often the gratuity is included in the per-person-cost.

I agree with you - there are two options for the OP. (1) Go and kwitcherbellyakin or (2) stay home.

[Secret]

So, what happened? Did you go to the party?

Update please!