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.
This is not intended to be a WRAL bashing thread, they are who I use to get my local news, and I actually like Monica Laliberte, but the way they do the ratings kinda gets my boxers in a wad.
Specifically, they leave off the 2 points that restaurants get for attending a food handling class, because "it has nothing to do with cleanliness". First of all, I worked in restaurants for a long time, and I attended these courses (back in the early 90's) and I would say it is probably the single-most important thing a restaurant can do. It's all about safe food handling practices to avoid bacteria growth, cross contamination and etc.
But they go to great lengths to report that "this was too warm", or "that was too cold", or even yesterday "a toilet seat was loose". Technically, none of these things have anything to do with cleanliness either, but they are important.
To me, it is misleading, and another example of sensationalist reporting to post a score lower than what is posted on the wall. And it's a huge diservice to a restaurant to misrepresent their score.
Most importantly, I'd rather eat at a place that needs paint on the walls, or has a loose toilet seat, or even needs to clean up a little bit, rather than eat at a place where the staff has not been trained on the proper way to handle raw chicken or pork, or how to properly cool a 5 gallon batch of soup without growing botchelism (sp?)...
Personally I wish they would leave out the restaurant ratings and throw in another Tarheel Traveler. I like Monica as well, and I think she does a great Five on Your Side
I enjoy the restaurant ratings. In fact I use them to decide where to avoid. I'm also thankful they do leave off the points for completing a food safety course. Just because the food safety course is completed does not mean the staff are then putting the learning into action when they return to work.
I do laugh at how a restaurant may seem to have a huge list of disgusting and serious violations, yet still emerges with an A.
I also don't think WRAL are the folks who give these scores, they just choose a variety to report on the show.
I also love the tarheel traveller. His visit to the gentleman from Deliverance (you sure got a purrty mouth) was a highlight!
We love the restaurant ratings, and I'm glad they leave out the points for taking the course. Of course the course is VERY important for the restaurant personnel, but the station removes it from the final number on their report so you can compare ratings.
It's also important to know exactly WHY they received such ratings, so if it's peeling paint in the restrooms, fine. Or if it's roaches in the soup, not so fine!
As far as the Tarheel Traveler, we like his stories, we like the reporter, but his singsong voice drives us up the wall.
I have a background in that industry from an earlier career. I can tell you that if a restaurant owner let's paint peel, and toilet seats go loose, and things get dirty "out front", you can bet your life they are letting something slip in the back of the house - meaning sanitation. It's a mindset thing.
As for things not being cold or warm enough, (if this is what you meant) this is critical....you shouldn't eat at any place that doesn't maintain their food at the right temperature - 5 degrees off can make a huge difference. This is asking for food poisoning.
While the op is right about the value of the sanitation class, I think every food service operation should be required to re-cert annually, I agree with RAL in that why add these points to the particular inspection that "earned" a poor rating IF staff took the class AFTER the rating. What counts is what the place was like "at inspection". If they learned anything in class, then their next inspection should reflect their increased awareness and attention to sanitation.
While the op is right about the value of the sanitation class, I think every food service operation should be required to re-cert annually, I agree with RAL in that why add these points to the particular inspection that "earned" a poor rating IF staff took the class AFTER the rating. What counts is what the place was like "at inspection". If they learned anything in class, then their next inspection should reflect their increased awareness and attention to sanitation.
I think you and I agee here?
Except that you don't get the points if you take it after the inspection (unless it has changed since I was in the business). The points only reflect if someone on staff has taken the class PRIOR to inspection.
I agree with you on a number of things:
-food temp is critical (which is covered in the class)
-Paint peeling and etc. is indicative of other problems
I think one of the key reasons I'm annoyed with this is because the entire rating system is a bunch of BS, and is very subjective. My feeling was that most inspectors would look around, and have a pretty good idea if a place was an A or a B or worse. Then they decide how much to report to get the score where they felt it should be. So if the inspector came in and "saw" a "low A", then they report enough problems to get the score there. So the inspector saw a 91.5, and WRAL is saying that it's an 89.5.
Fact is that these are legitimate scores. My point is that an UNDERSTANDING of proper food handling is at least as important as surface cleaning. A restaurant that cares enough to employ an educated and informed staff is less likely to have most of the violations, and will get a mid to up 90's score.
But anyway, I am glad to hear others replies. Seems like I'm somewhat on my own with this one.
EDIT> Also as a veteran of MANY restaurants, I can assure you that a lot of gross stuff happens. I'm not defending it, but I'd much rather eat at a place who cared enough to have good practices, and had the background to use them. I'd much rather eat something that survived the "3-second rule" than a salad that was just cut on a cutting board that was also used for raw chicken, or a soup that was put in the walk-in cooler to cool, instead of using an ice-bath (as instructed in the class).
I just truly watch and listen for the sound effects! Awwwwww! Owwwwww! Yeahhhh! Alright! They crack me up even if the restaurant may not crack their eggs right or leaves their meat slightly above a safe temperature...... Please keep the sounds effects coming!
From a theoretical standpoint I can't believe all they find on a restaurant that is wrong and there rating may go down 2 or 3 points!??? I would think logically if they find 10 or more things wrong during the inspection a failing grade should be given...but that's just me...Awwwwww!!
I just truly watch and listen for the sound effects! Awwwwww! Owwwwww! Yeahhhh! Alright! They crack me up even if the restaurant may not crack their eggs right or leaves their meat slightly above a safe temperature...... Please keep the sounds effects coming!
From a theoretical standpoint I can't believe all they find on a restaurant that is wrong and there rating may go down 2 or 3 points!??? I would think logically if they find 10 or more things wrong during the inspection a failing grade should be given...but that's just me...Awwwwww!!
From what I remember when I had my places, it's weighted. Some things are deal breakers more than others. Personally, I get concerned if I am in a place that has a low A.
As for the OP's last comments to me...I thought that they had taken the class after the inspection/as the result of the inspection? I assumed that meant a regrade. They used to give you a chance if you had a first time low score or would drop a grade. They'd let you sweat it for a week by displaying the "B" grade and then come back for a reinspection to give you a chance to get your grade up. I never needed this but have seen some places that did.
Yes, I thought they didn't add the class points because they came AFTER the initial inspection. So WRAL shares the original points of all the restaurants.
The additional class points, to me, would just mean they are trying a little harder than they did before. But nobody would know if they applied the knowledge until the next inspection.
I once went into a restaurant with an 89, and we asked the manager about it. He said that everything that was wrong was inconsequential. We asked what changes had been made since the inspection. He couldn't tell us(!). We walked out. It looked like a lovely, well-maintained place, too.
From what I remember when I had my places, it's weighted. Some things are deal breakers more than others. Personally, I get concerned if I am in a place that has a low A.
As for the OP's last comments to me...I thought that they had taken the class after the inspection/as the result of the inspection? I assumed that meant a regrade. They used to give you a chance if you had a first time low score or would drop a grade. They'd let you sweat it for a week by displaying the "B" grade and then come back for a reinspection to give you a chance to get your grade up. I never needed this but have seen some places that did.
Thanks RaleighLass! I understand it better! So passing you the YEAHHHH! sounds affect!
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.
