Restaurants who make their waitresses go 8-10 hours without eating. (employees, owner)
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 don't get this. Let me preface this by saying that I've worked at dozens of places in the city literally, from sports bars to hotel bars, to fine dining, to Hooters, to dive bars. I would break them down into three categories regarding their eating on shift policy: 1) scheduled breaks (a rarity) 2) no scheduled breaks but if there is downtime you can eat with no repercussions (the bulk of the places I've worked, which I'm fine with...I understand if it gets crazy I can't eat and frankly I don't want to) 3) places with a NO EATING ON SHIFT ANYTIME FOR ANY REASON (an unfortunate minority, but not extremely rare). My new job #2 is like this.
It's cruel for owners to do this their staff. Would they go 9 or 10 hours without eating anything? Especially if they were running back and forth?
I think part of the reason owners have these policies are because patrons are so hostile to the idea of servers taking breaks. Naturally if a server takes a break they get someone to cover their section, which the covering server will inevitably hear, "I don't know WHAT happened to our server, she disappeared!" or "I guess our server is GONE!" in a dramatic fashion. If I'm breaking to eat at the bar or a place visible to a patron, a lot of them will ask me for things like I'm still working even though someone's covering me: "Sorry to interrupt your meal." (in a sarcastic tone) I worked at a corporate place where we had to take a break and all the scheduled PM servers breaked at the same time, so they cut off cocktailing and only kept dining open for about a half hour, so for that half hour patrons would have to serve themselves from the bar (we wouldn't get the whole half hour to eat, half of it would be a shift meeting). I can't tell you how many times I explained that to patrons to be told, "That's stupid." Or, "That's dumb." Yeah, it's dumb that we have to shove as much food as we can into our mouths for 15 minutes before it turns into a madhouse in here.
Yes. All workers (servers, anyone) are entitled to a break in NY State. I believe it's a 30 minute break for 8 hours work.
I remember at one job someone asked a manager about this and he stuttered and said, "I think...my understanding is it's different for restaurants." What a load of bullcrap.
It's interesting to see people like Chef Ramsay having his staff (or himself) cook up a meal before service and getting the whole staff to sit down to eat together. He says the servers and chefs perform better on a full stomach, can think better, and work more easily as a team when they dine together.
I'm in total agreement. If you own a restaurant, it's not going to break the bank to allow your employees a simple pasta dish before serving.
What I don't get is why restauranteurs forget that waiters and waitresses are paid so little that they oftentimes cannot feed themselves on their salaries. I see my friends in the industry (cooks, and busboys mostly) taking a little food home with them to eat that night - something silly like a little fried chicken or a hamburger. This with the under-the-table understanding that no--one tells the owner!
I just couldn't be that jerk of an employer that lets employees go that long without eating. It takes a really cruel person to do something like that. They are also likely the ones quoting that they are not entitled to lunch breaks.
Yes. All workers (servers, anyone) are entitled to a break in NY State. I believe it's a 30 minute break for 8 hours work.
I remember at one job someone asked a manager about this and he stuttered and said, "I think...my understanding is it's different for restaurants." What a load of bullcrap.
Is this on every shift that you work or during those busy times/days? Does this occur of slow days?
Funny thing is MOST business owners would do this if they didn't have a fear of their workers dropping dead of starvation and suing them.
Yes, no doubt about it... Even though many, and possibly most workers today receive an UNPAID lunch break. What advantage is there to having a worker work the same 8 hours, without a moment to recharge their batteries and allow their brains to recoup? Some of us still rely on our mental capacities to make a living. Worn out and burned out workers are more prone to mistakes and accidents...
I eat out a lot, frequenting mostly the same, small group of restaurants. I've seen idiotic patrons interrupt servers who were obviously taking a short break. It happened once at a restaurant we also use on occasion for corporate meals, that are dozens of times the revenue of the complaining party of two or three. I called the manager over, and told her if she did not want to lose our corp business, she had better go over to the table of folks whining, and explain the sitaution to them. She did, asked if I was satisfied, and I told her yes, but you should not have needed me to prompt you to do that.
Every time since I have seen her covering for servers taking a short break herself, before idiotic patrons whine about very short breaks.
Is this on every shift that you work or during those busy times/days? Does this occur of slow days?
It's a policy. No eating on shift.
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.
