This above is one of the problems as I see it: cooks "earning" that "degree" cannot live on the wages paid, particularly if it is for "many many" years. Simply put, and with things such as location, cost of living, etc. notwithstanding, if a new cook cannot make a reasonable living on his/her pay, how does anyone expect to train and keep good cooks? What you do get are those who spend the cash to attend a culinary (often "culinary", i.e. questionable training) schools who then upon graduation refuse to be - or more often become those Disgruntled Cooks (that need firing) - line cooks because the pay is a whopping 2 bucks more, maybe, than the "unschooled" line cook. Many "schooled" cooks have developed an attitude that they are somehow trained when all they have in fact is some "book learning". Toss a "school cook" behind the line on a Friday night as a saute dog and watch a Learned Cook melt into a puddle of goo. I generalize, mind you, but the point of this far too long rant is: beginning pay for a cook (or any profession, actually) must be realistic. Min. wage in the US, for example, is quite UNrealistic. It's shameful, actually. Would it shake up the economy if fed. min. wage was bumped up to 10/hour? Sure would, but it would all be for the best, I think. An argumentative idea indeed, sure. As for the bennies, I would wager that if the US had universal health care (big ugly rant in and of itself), restaurants would have far less "complaining" about low pay because one could actually *go* to a doctor when one was sick and not have to worry about working 10 hours overtime to pay the extortionist doctors. Complicated issue(s) though in general. Peace... Rael
