Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I clearly do have knowledge, and have posted on hygiene matters on the thread.
Who made you the judge of who should post and not post on a thread.
No, you really don’t as I have refuted your claims numerous times in this thread. Maybe stick with your British forum because we are talking about the U.S.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,184 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile
No, you really don’t as I have refuted your claims numerous times in this thread. Maybe stick with your British forum because we are talking about the U.S.
No I am not, I am talking about the entire world.
If the US doesn't have similar laws in relation to basic hygiene then I would very surprised and in terms of dress code that is also generally the same in terms iof find dining and in many chains.
In terms of refuting my claims, you haven't my claims are written in guidance and laws by the food standards agency in terms of basic hygiene laws, if the US can't meet basic hygiene laws then you have a real problem.
It has been pointed out several times in this thread that we are talking about the context of a typical tattoo'd person in good standing with a restaurant. This implies someone typical of today's time period who has been contributing to the success of a business. This means their outward look isn't detracting from business and the owner/operator of said business has accepted it. We are not talking about fringe outliers here...
At its core, the thread is about whether or not one's own initial assessment of another person based on looks alone would cause a change in how they treat said person. This is really very similar to discussions of whether or not racial profiling is acceptable in law enforcement. This isn't about the wider topic of social acceptance. You may not accept a person's interests, looks, or being but are you willing to measure based on the context of work output/service alone?
Smoking was perfectly normal 30 years ago because the health risk of second hand smoke weren't understood/known. Going further back, athletes used to smoke before their performance because it was believed that smoking opened up the lungs. If smoking didn't impact the health risks of those around you, it would still be perfectly routine and acceptable to smoke in restaurants and cars with windows up with children.
Two completely different things.
The equivalent of USMC's approach would be around a discussion on whether or not one's assessment of service of another person would change if they were a gun owner assuming he/she is in good standing at their place of business. Are you willing to measure a worker by their service/output despite their political standing on gun ownership that you may not agree with? Then someone posted implied that gun owners are killers and posted pictures of mass shooters.
you are 100% accurate about this.
We are not discussing if a restaurant should allow the employees to have tattoos, we are discussing if a good waiters should be tipped less simply because he had tattoos. If the waiter was allowed to work there in the first place, then his tattoo did not violate the restaurant's dress code policy. I will provide my answer based on this and this alone.
If the US doesn't have similar laws in relation to basic hygiene then I would very surprised and in terms of dress code that is also generally the same in terms iof find dining and in many chains.
In terms of refuting my claims, you haven't my claims are written in guidance and laws by the food standards agency in terms of basic hygiene laws, if the US can't meet basic hygiene laws then you have a real problem.
You do not know our food code or practices of inspections yet you post as if you do. You don’t, I have refuted your claims numerous times.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,184 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile
You do not know our food code or practices of inspections yet you post as if you do. You don’t, I have refuted your claims numerous times.
In virtually every country I know of visible piercings are not permitted when handling and serving food, hair must be tied back and beards also well groomed or kept in a net. As for Jewellery only minimal amounts are allowed usually in relation to a wedding ring. In terms of tattoos employers are allowed to have their own dress cide in relation to displayed tattoos, tattooos on your face, neck hands ot offensive tattoos.
This is just very basic stuff in most countries and to pretend I don't know the law in the US is nonsense, it's just basic hygiene and dress code policies.
It's first day on the job kind of stuff, such as wash your hands reguarly, don't smoke, don't chew gun, remove all piercings and jewellery, always wear clean cothes have cleand and tidy hair, a clean and tidy beard and wear a hair or beard net if appropriate, and in terms of dress code cover tattoos up and make sure all wounds have a coloured plaster on them.
1) Body art is almost-always shallowness and narcissism.
2) We need to establish standards....
Absolute and utter nonsense. Please cite some peer-reviewed scientific studies to back up your claim or admit that you pulled it out of your 4th point of contact....
We are not discussing if a restaurant should allow the employees to have tattoos, we are discussing if a good waiters should be tipped less simply because he had tattoos. If the waiter was allowed to work there in the first place, then his tattoo did not violate the restaurant's dress code policy. I will provide my answer based on this and this alone.
You shouldn't reward things you disapprove of.
Most people don't want to eat at restaurants where the waiters have face-tattoos and bones in their noses. And they would like to show their displeasure either by formal-complaint, by not patronizing that restaurant, or possibly other means.
I would assume that a waiter getting tipped less because they want to present themselves as a freak, would upset the other crew members, who would either want the freaks fired, or wouldn't want to work with them at all(whether different shifts, or finding a different job).
If I didn't just walk out immediately, I would tip them zero and write my reason why on the ticket, so that all the other employees would know.
I don't claim that I know every details of every restaurant's dress code policy, but I know having a few tattoos or piercings don't automatically disqualify a person from obtaining a position at a restaurant.
Like I posted earlier, I have a friend who works at a pretty upscale restaurant in orange county, he has quite a few pretty big tattoos on his arms. If he is a "freak" of some kind, he would be a neat and clean freak. Everything has to be super clean. He looks like Armie Hammer, and this makes him quite popular. Do I think he would be more successful without those big tattoos? I think it depends on which profession he would be choosing in the future. Since he chose to be a singer/song waiter, I don't think his tattoos would make any differences.
My fiance's dad owns several Italian restaurants. The dad is a pretty conservative guy, I think he requires the tattoos to be covered up, and no facial piercings. One guy has a lip piercing done and he wears a retainer type of piercing (retainer is basically made of bioplast soft plastic type of material), he is still allowed working there. I saw a waiter has arm tattoos working at cheesecake factory, he is a good waiter. So it doesn't bother me.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 04-30-2019 at 09:27 AM..
Give me anyone that can serve me my food reasonably well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Everything has to be super clean. He looks like Armie Hammer, and this makes him quite popular. Do I think he would be more successful without those big tattoos? I think it depends on which profession he would be choosing in the future. Since he chose to be a singer/song waiter, I don't think his tattoos would make any differences. 
