restaurant etiquitte

[reesek]

i have a specific situation which i'd love feedback on and then a general question for the thread -

about a week ago, my boyfriend and i took another couple to brunch at a seattle spot very famous for their sunday brunches. we each had 2 mimosas which upped the bill considerably (from it's already high for seattle price of just under $30 per person)

the next night - all four of us were afflicted with food poisoning. it took a while to unravel the mystery - but since all 4 of us were violently ill and only shared the one meal together - it was pretty clear that the brunch was the culprit.

i emailed the restaurant to let them know. i did not ask to be reimbursed. i received a reply in which the manager noted that mine was the only complaint they'd received. i have no idea if her comment was intended to comfort me (ie - no one else had suffered as we had) or to call into question our honesty. she asked for my address which i gave to her. later that week we received a gift certificate for $100 (food only no liquor).

am i right to feel a little put out? the gift certificate didn't even cover the cost of the food we vomitted. the "gift" means we'd need to eat there again...frankly the way they handled the situation more than the lousy piece of shellfish or tainted cream is what makes me feel unlikely to ever go back. bad crab (i refuse to blame the oysters) can happen to good restaurants - but shouldn't good restaurants do a better job of taking care of their patrons?

generally speaking - how far should restaurants go to make patrons happy? if they screw up a reservation...if a waiter is inattentive...where does the responsibility lie for the experience of the diner? when i used to wait tables, i believed it was my responsibility to help guide my guests through their meals - is that an unfair expectation?

[tommy]

a hundred bucks would certainly make me pretty happy.

[rancho_gordo]

I have to say, I find the email kind of an odd way of communicating to a restaurant. I wonder if you had called and talked to someone if they would have been more sympathetic. Or written a real letter.

But maybe I'm an old-fashioned fart.

[reesek]

you know, i thought about that...i'm kind of non-confrontational so i love the ability to email people but i did wonder the same thing. i also emailed them on tuesday, while at work - and i was still in absolute agony. i had to be at work - miserable, but there was no choice - but i really didn't have the energy for what i imagined might be a long time on hold...the staff at this particular spot tend to be very young. and i did want to contact them as soon as i could.

[tommy]

do you think they should have given you more than 100 dollars? do you think they should send 100 dollars to everyone who emails complaining about food poisoning?

[reesek]

i think the least they could have done was comped (or sent a gc) for the amount of food we paid for. i'm not really sure if i'm reading your post right - but i feel some aggression there and i don't know why. i got sick from the food they served...are they not at all responsible for that?

[tommy]

i'm not being aggressive. i'm just trying to clarify if you think they should reimburse everyone who emails complaints about food poisoning.

[reesek]

i think they should take care of people they make sick. i don't think they would have wanted my proof.

[tommy]

let me ask again: do you think they should reimburse everyone who emails complaints about food poisoning.

if your answer is 'no', then why? if your answer is 'yes', then how?

[reesek]

tommy - i can't really answer your question about what their policies should be - i don't own a restaurant. however i do think they should have a policy - maybe they do - maybe it's $25 per person no matter what the complaint - i have no idea - but the $100 felt very arbitrary. and though i mentioned my friends by name (including the one who was very nearly hospitalized) the restaurant didn't ask for their info at all.

you keep mentioning email in your posts - would it have been different if i'd called or written a letter?

[tommy]

calling or writing is always appropriate for any sort of business transaction. email is rarely appropriate.

we obviously can't guess if they would have handled a letter differently. but, they might have.

it doesn't matter if you own a restaurant. i'm simply asking what you think they should have done for you, since 100 dollars clearly wasn't enough.

Edited February 2, 2004 by tommy (log)

[reesek]

calling or writing is always appropriate for any sort of business transaction. email is rarely appropriate.

so why do restaurants list an email address?

[bleachboy]

so why do restaurants list an email address?

My guess would be that they do it for simple inquiries or the like. If I were the manager there, and I received what sounded even like a very legitimate complaint, I would be suspicious.

I once worked at a pizza place, and there was a certain customer that would call every single time they ordered a pizza -- and I mean, every time -- to let us know we'd screwed up their order and that they wanted the next pizzas for free. Being a chain, the manager always sent them some gift certificates. The moral of that anecdote is simply that some people do abuse the tenet that "the customer is always right", and perhaps sending an email made your complaint even more faceless.

Actually showing up at the restaurant would have yielded you much better results, I'd wager, especially if the chef got involved.

[josephreese]

If I feel I've been wronged in some way, and I want restitution of some kind, when I speak with whomever wronged me I'm explicit about what I expect in return.

In this case, if I were certain the restauant caused the food poisoning, I'd demand a refund on the bill. The manager might not acquiesce, of course. If the manager wanted to make a different kind of restitution, we'd have a starting point for the discussion.

The $100 hasn't soothed you, so perhaps some thought should be given to what you expect.

[mnebergall]

calling or writing is always appropriate for any sort of business transaction. email is rarely appropriate.

I disagree that using email is rarely an appropriate method for business transactions. In this day and age, email is just as appropriate as any other mode of communication for doing business, even reportiing food poisening to a restaurant.

[lala]

Sorry you had this experience.

My guess in saying that you're the only one to complain was to cover their a**. If they admitted, in any way that they were at fault, it would, in their eyes open the door to possible lawsuits from your group. Having worked in restaurants and retail, I know that the lawyers coach the management staff thusly: First, and foremost, do not admit fault, even if other customers have the same complaint. Just offer apologies, even say that no one else reported it, and do whatever your refund policy is.

I'm in Seattle, and I have an idea of which place you went to, and if I'm right, their corporate Manager training has been influenced by the lawyers.

If ya really want to rattle their chains, report them to the Health Department.

[fifi]

On the amount of $100... The point that seems be missed here is that the original meal was more than $100. Four people X $30 = $120 + whatever the charge for 8 mimosas. All four got sick. I wouldn't accept $100, either.

I think the argument about the e-mail versus letter, in person, etc. is superfluous. Food poisoning is a serious issue. The communication should include the parties involved, what each of them ate, the time they ate it, and the time of the onset of illness, and the symptoms involved (vomiting, diarreah, fever). This should be discussed with the chef/owner, whoever is really in charge. The problem with an e-mail to a general business address is that you don't know who is reading it. The important thing is that the information get to whoever can identify the culprit and get use of the product stopped. Keep in mind that the source of, let's say, the shellfish, may also go to other restaurants. This is serious business and preventing exposure of the very young, old, or immune system compromised is the important thing here. I wouldn't rule out notifying the health department.

[Exotic Mushroom]

I think that when a high end establishment screws up, throwing money at the problem is exactly the wrong way to go. I think that if I were reesek, a sincere apology would make me feel much better than any amount of money. It sounds like what irks her the most is how dismissive of her complaint the response was.

I had a terrible service experience recently. I went to the downstairs cafe at a nationally known restaurant where I eat probably once a week (and I eat upstairs every three months or so) and had to wait forty five minutes to be given even a glass of water. It wasn't even busy at the time, but even if it was, that's no excuse. When I told the waiter after I was finally acknowledged how long I had been waiting, he comped me a glass of wine and that was it. I expected at the very least the manager would come apologize to me personally and most likely offer a gift certificate or something to encourage me to return. But monetary reimbursment, in that situation, was really immaterial. I wanted to be made to feel like they actually did think treating me that way was a terrible mistake. I wanted to be told by someone in a position of authority how sorry they were. And in the end, the $10 glass of wine just felt like a slap in the face. That's what a loyal customer deserves after being made to wait nearly an hour?

Even though this was my absolute favorite restaurant, I don't think I'll ever return. I faxed a letter of complaint to both the manager and chef/owner the following day, but never heard anything about it.

I think it is absolutely the responsibility of restaurants to go to great lengths to mollify their customers when they screw up. And for me at least, money has little to do with it. What's important is making your patrons feel like they matter to you.

[reesek]

my friend did call the health department - it was his girlfriend that got so sick and he was worried and angry. they called all of us for their report.

it was amazing how incredibly nice and sympathetic the health department was - if the restaurant had even approached that sympathy - i think i would have left this entirely behind me with no ill will.

thanks very much for the feedback and comments - i think this really boils down to a "do unto others" philosophy of mine that i really have no right expecting from other people - i end up feeling disappointed that i have to ask for/demand what in my opinion should be a given.

[tommy]

calling or writing is always appropriate for any sort of business transaction.  email is rarely appropriate.

I disagree that using email is rarely an appropriate method for business transactions. In this day and age, email is just as appropriate as any other mode of communication for doing business, even reportiing food poisening to a restaurant.

in my experience, most transactions still go down when the pen hits the paper.

[misstenacity]

I was traveling on business and went to a medium-high level restaurant to have dinner. I had an entree, wine, and dessert. When I went back to bed a few hours later in the hotel I felt a little "rumbly", but attributed it to pre-client jitters.

However, when I woke up 3 hours later vomiting, I attributed it to the meal I had. I went back to sleep and got up the next morning feeling a little shaken but not too bad. I called the restaurant and told them what happened, and they apologized profusely for my symptoms (specifically avoiding taking blame, which was smart, since I had no companions to back up my complaints). They also asked me exactly what I ate, what time I came in, and if I was OK now. I told them I was fine and the food *tasted* good, so I wasn't very angry, just wanted them to be aware of any contamination problems.

They offered to comp my meal (a refund, not a gift certificate), and I declined.

To this day, I actually don't know why I declined (probably because the memory of being sick was already almost gone), but in any case the restaurant did everything right - they were sympathetic, detail oriented, and wanted to make things right.

I would go back there without a second thought.

Miss Tenacity

[beans]

I had a terrible service experience recently. I went to the downstairs cafe at a nationally known restaurant where I eat probably once a week (and I eat upstairs every three months or so) and had to wait forty five minutes to be given even a glass of water. It wasn't even busy at the time, but even if it was, that's no excuse. When I told the waiter after I was finally acknowledged how long I had been waiting, he comped me a glass of wine and that was it. I expected at the very least the manager would come apologize to me personally and most likely offer a gift certificate or something to encourage me to return. But monetary reimbursment, in that situation, was really immaterial. I wanted to be made to feel like they actually did think treating me that way was a terrible mistake. I wanted to be told by someone in a position of authority how sorry they were. And in the end, the $10 glass of wine just felt like a slap in the face. That's what a loyal customer deserves after being made to wait nearly an hour?

Even though this was my absolute favorite restaurant, I don't think I'll ever return. I faxed a letter of complaint to both the manager and chef/owner the following day, but never heard anything about it.

I think it is absolutely the responsibility of restaurants to go to great lengths to mollify their customers when they screw up. And for me at least, money has little to do with it. What's important is making your patrons feel like they matter to you.

Exotic Mushroom --

Being called tableside for an unhappy customer complaint is hell for any member of management. And often management can or may empower their staff to comp something as a matter of avoiding those sorts of situations. This is also done so that in the horrible event of a tableside apology goes awry, with an irrational guest grandstanding, so as not to impede upon the enjoyment of the surrounding guests. Just think of someone hot, red in the face and screaming, sprinkle in the ones that like doing aggressive finger pointing and swearing -- you get the picture?

I would believe the letter of complaint may have generated an inquiry to that server for handing out a free glass of wine very possibly without management's approval. Alcohol can never be given away for free within the State of oHIo -- but there are routes around that not relevant to this discussion, so if that were the case that server might have been fired. (Free dessert for "minor fixes" is what most of our servers are permitted to do, before having to involve a manager for comp'ing a portion of their check being the next step). However, if that server was empowered by management to rectify a situation with a free glass of wine as a way to smooth things out, then they were in fact doing their job in management's eyes. In this instance, then no, management most likely will not respond to your letter of complaint.

******

Something else in this thread I seem to remember being a very important policy for Disney (I was a castmember for several years). Should something occur within the store/park/property (hotel/restaurant) to upset a guest -- in no shape or form were the words "I'm sorry" ever to escape your mouth. It was researched by some legal eagles via judicial opinion, case law or whatever pillar of rationale and/or reasoning that such a statment is an affirmation and indicative of maintaining some responsiblity.

Best phrasing, which we did practice with roll playing during our constant corporate training -- "I understand your concerns and allow me to offer x, y or z in an effort to regain your satisfaction in this matter."

edit: sloppy proof reading

Edited February 2, 2004 by beans (log)

[Carolyn Tillie]

calling or writing is always appropriate for any sort of business transaction.  email is rarely appropriate.

I disagree that using email is rarely an appropriate method for business transactions. In this day and age, email is just as appropriate as any other mode of communication for doing business, even reportiing food poisening to a restaurant.

in my experience, most transactions still go down when the pen hits the paper.

Yeah, I agree with Tommy. "In this day and age," I feel e-mail is appropriate for conducting business IF a business relationship already exists.

I think notifying a restaurant of food poisoning should be via a phone call as it is more immediate (some restaurant managers don't check their e-mails for DAYS). At least a phone call can be dealt with immediately.

If I want and/or expect some form of compensation, than a formal letter with "pen on paper" is far more appropriate.

[lala]

"Being called tableside for an unhappy customer complaint is hell for any member of management."

Sorry, that's part of what 'Management' is: dealing with disgruntled customers, whether it's doing the deed themselves, or backing up their staff. God knows I've done enough of it. They may scream in the back room before they go out, but it is their JOB to do it.

[beans]

They may scream in the back room before they go out, but it is their JOB to do it.

I never stated it wasn't.