restaurant etiquitte

Pan · February 3, 2004

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."

If you said that after pouring tea on me or worse, I'd react angrily. I'm sure you disliked management at Disney.

cakewench · February 3, 2004

E-mail is an entirely appropriate way to communicate, and just as valid as a 'real' letter or a phone call. As stated above, if they actually publicize their email address, they must expect to receive correspondance there.

Of course, if you are sending a professional e-mail, it's also assumed that you are including a telephone number as well in case they want to speak to you on that medium. It's pretty standard to include that info at the end, in the 'business card' format.

This is not to say that I don't believe in the power of writing a physical letter. Honestly, the best format (in my opinion, of course! :raz: ) is to send the e-mail right away, and if there is no response within the reasonable time frame (although, in this case, 'reasonable time frame' is 'immediately'), then send a follow-up hard copy through snail mail with a meticulously polite "here is the correspondance I have already sent, to your email which you helpfully posted on your menus/business cards. I was just curious as to why I haven't heard back..."

So yeah. I think fifi is correct. I would have expected a full refund, in this case. For the record, I am not one who expects free food when items are late (okay, I've been in Europe too long, perhaps. We just waited an hour for our food at lunch on Sunday, with just a 'yes the kitchen is busy' after about the 50 min mark. Hey, at least we had good conversation...). This isn't your typical service-related incident, though. At the very least, the refund is warranted because the product was faulty. Unfortunately, faulty in this case has serious consequences (illness, or worse).

tommy · February 3, 2004

I would have expected a full refund, in this case. For the record, I am not one who expects free food when items are late (okay, I've been in Europe too long, perhaps.

i want the email address of this restaurant so i can get a 300 dollar gift certificate too!

lala, i didn't bring up the email thing. in fact, i didn't think it was particularly germane to the discussion. i was asked about my thoughts on it, and then several people didn't agree, and one decided that he should try to insult me. i was merely responding to those posts. i have no need to hammer away at it, as i know i'm right, and my business correspondence is handled in a timely and reasonable fashion. i've never had a problem with it, and i don't suspect i will. :wink: :rolleyes:

tommy · February 3, 2004

is to send the e-mail right away, and if there is no response within the reasonable time frame (although, in this case, 'reasonable time frame' is 'immediately'),

aside from what should be obvious reasons why a restaurant wouldn't get the email right away (they don't have someone sitting in front of a computer 24-7), there are also the situations where emails aren't delivered for hours, days, or even months. i would dare say if you've never experienced this, you've all been very very lucky. clearly, if your concern truly is the welfare of others, get on the phone that night and leave your computer turned off.

beans · February 3, 2004

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."
If you said that after pouring tea on me or worse, I'd react angrily. I'm sure you disliked management at Disney.

Actually, I loved working for Disney.

And I wouldn't be so foolish as to pour tea on any of my guests, when I worked at Disney or currently. :wink:

lala · February 3, 2004

Tommy, it must be good to always be right... :wink:

That said, here in Seattle, which is ahead of the curve technologically, e-mail has become de rigeur in business communication. You're in New York, right? There may be regional differences at work here in this offshoot discussion.

Edited February 3, 2004 by lala (log)

beans · February 3, 2004

Tommy, it must be good to always be right...
That said, here in Seattle, which is ahead of the curve technologically, e-mail has become de rigeur in business communication. You're in New York, right? There may be regional differences at work here in this offshoot discussion.

No, he's in Jersey.

Callipygos · February 3, 2004

What I'm not understanding in all of this is -- why reimburse with a gift certificate? To me, that smacks of, "You got food poisoning from us? Sorry -- here, come back and have some more!"

But maybe that's just me.

tommy · February 3, 2004

What I'm not understanding in all of this is -- why reimburse with a gift certificate? To me, that smacks of, "You got food poisoning from us? Sorry -- here, come back and have some more!"
But maybe that's just me.

do you think the restaurant regularly serves food that poisons customers?

you can get a bad oyster at *any* restaurant (and no people, please don't take this literally as me saying "he had oysters and they were bad". 10 posts asking why i think he had bad oysters will do nothing for this thread). assuming the customer thought enough of the place to try it in the first place, i don't see a gift certificate being totally out of the question. what are the other options? cash? surely not.

Edited February 3, 2004 by tommy (log)

tommy · February 3, 2004

Tommy, it must be good to always be right...
That said, here in Seattle, which is ahead of the curve technologically, e-mail has become de rigeur in business communication. You're in New York, right? There may be regional differences at work here in this offshoot discussion.
No, he's in Jersey.

not that it matters. the email issue is a global issue. i have to assume that even people who live in Seattle email those outside of Seattle every now and again.

the email issue is only one small part of this discussion, and i think we've discussed it enough. many people have voiced their opinions on it (usually in the form of "i think you're wrong", which i suppose is better than nothing), and additional discussion on that aspect might best be served on a separate thread.

Edited February 3, 2004 by tommy (log)

lala · February 3, 2004

Sorry, Tommy, but I'd have to say that a gift certificate would not make me happy. If I've gotten that ill at a restaurant (and I have), I would not be eager to set foot in it again. Knowing what I know about restaurants (and that's a lot), most food poisoning cases result from poor sanitation/holding temperature/food rotation practices, not (for instance) a single bad oyster. There are many restaurants out there, and I wouldn't want to go back to one that I'm suspicious of.

And...while e-mail is a global tool, there ARE regional differences. Just like there are cultural and food differences. In Seattle, where the original poster lives (as well as myself), people seem to prefer e-mail to snail mail - remember, we live in the shadow of Microsoft, and have an abundance of tech companies. This has created a culture that is extremely comfortable with technology, as well as being a bit more casual than the East Coast, even in business. I'm not saying you're wrong, but maybe you could see that other viewpoints and knowledge are valid, too, instead of just telling us all that you're right and attempting to stop any further discussion.

Edited February 4, 2004 by lala (log)

tommy · February 3, 2004

lala, i said "i'm right" in gest. i'm sorry if you didn't see the irony in the statement. however, to the extent that i actually meant "i'm right", i did qualify it, explaining that my methods have always worked for me, and suppose they always will. i wasn't trying to quell discussion on email, but rather move it elsewhere. i think i was clear.

and no one has come out and offered an alternative to the Gift Certificate. could someone just come out and say that they want restaurants to send them cash if they email claims of food poisoning?!?!? that way i can shake my head at this car wreck and move on. :laugh:

Edited February 3, 2004 by tommy (log)

EllenC · February 3, 2004

Okay Tommy, I want restaurants to send me cash if I e-mail them. In fact, I want everyone I send an e-mail to to send me cash. Even if I don't e-mail, PLEASE feel free to send me cash. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this. :biggrin: :laugh:

tommy · February 3, 2004

Okay Tommy, I want restaurants to send me cash if I e-mail them. In fact, I want everyone I send an e-mail to to send me cash. Even if I don't e-mail, PLEASE feel free to send me cash. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

just as i suspected! :laugh:

reesek · February 3, 2004

tommy - i don't want to have to eat there again to get restitution - that's all. if they wanted to let me drink there - that would have been a possibility - but that wasn't what they did. if they had called, had even inquired after my friends or followed up with even a hand-written note in the envelope with the stupid gift certificate - i wouldn't have felt so angry. i probably wouldn't have used it - but i wouldn't have felt that they'd dismissed me - which is how i feel.

they could give a shit about me - they've made that very clear. i won't be returning there.

finally - when i emailed them (wisdom of that particular decision notwithstanding) i didn't ask for a refund. i was SICK and i genuinely didn't know protocol other than - notify offenders and they'll take care of it. i imagined "take care" would include but not necessarily be limited to:

ensure all employees wash hands

check for other cases of illness and examine food safety issues

make sure customer is ok

make effort to reverse negative experience of customers

from their response i'm not confident they did any of those things. i did include my phone number - and never got a phone call asking any of the questions they'd need to have answered for the food safety issues and they were very generic (hence what i term a lack of effort) in handling issues 3 & 4. it's really not the money - it's the fact that they don't care.

edited to clarify effort

Edited February 3, 2004 by reesek (log)

Mudpuppie · February 3, 2004

The glass of wine was the apology. Did you drink it? Then you accepted it.
[...]
Within my employing restaurant, the velvet glove apology doesn't happen because the guest 99.9999999999% of the time wants a comp, a gift certificate or full refund. If a sympathetic apology was the only thing offered that's when the decibels tend increase on the upset party's side with the usual question of "Aren't you going to take something off of this bill??????? No! I want a full refund!!!!!"

I'm only halfway through this thread (which I made the mistake of turning my back on), so apologies if someone else has already said this. But....

Does accepting the only apology/retribution offered (in Mushroom's case, a measly glass of wine in return for a history of customer loyalty) necessarily mean that you endorse and accept the apology? Should you leave it untouched just to show that you're unhappy, or take it for what it is -- a free glass of wine? If someone offers you a $100 gift certificate but you feel you deserve more, should you tear the certificate up or use it?

My feeling is that it's okay to accept and utilize what you're offered. If you're unhappy with it and in an assertive mood, deal with it right then. If you need time to collect your thoughts, deal with it later, but be honest about what you've already been offered.

I would have drunk the wine, remained pissed throughout the meal, and written a letter when I got home. Just like Mushroom did. I don't think drinking the wine was in any way unethical. And I don't think he waived his right to an apology.

I never go into these situations wanting to get free stuff out if it. I'm sure people do, but most reasonable people don't. If I complain, it means I worked up the guts to complain, and I want to be respected and taken seriously.

(And am I the only one who takes a special glee from immediately identifying Exotic Mushroom's unnamed restaurant?)

josephreese · February 3, 2004

(And am I the only one who takes a special glee from immediately identifying Exotic Mushroom's unnamed restaurant?)

I've never been there, but I think I've guessed it.

No glee from me until I've dined there. :wink:

marie-louise · February 3, 2004

(And am I the only one who takes a special glee from immediately identifying Exotic Mushroom's unnamed restaurant?)
I've never been there, but I think I've guessed it.
No glee from me until I've dined there.

Inquiring minds can find the answer in the California board. The owner of this restaurant has a cookbook (okay, don't they all-that's not much of a hint!)

Fat Guy · February 3, 2004

I hope everybody involved in this discussion can at least see both sides of this issue, which comes up often.

From the consumer perspective:

- The consumer has been victimized.

- The consumer has suffered extreme discomfort.

- The cause of the discomfort has been determined.

From the restaurant perspective:

- A restaurant can take every precaution and still the occasional bad oyster or other product that has become infected earlier in the supply chain, through no fault of the restaurant, can be served to a customer.

- Fraudulent claims are common and it's difficult to separate the legitimate ones from the illegitimate ones.

- Causation is very difficult to establish, and most claims of food poisoning are unfounded or misdirected.

- Admission of wrongdoing can lead to greater liability.

There's an additional perspective worth mentioning here: that of eGullet's management. We have a number of concerns about food poisoning claims, and have addressed them somewhat in our user agreement. In addition, we are concerned that the party who is wronged is typically the only party who will actually speak on our site. As a result, the story will most often be told in a certain way. Thus, while we are willing to host discussion of general food-poisoning issues like this one, we insist that all identifying information about the restaurant in question be omitted.

beans · February 3, 2004

In response:

Does accepting the only apology/retribution offered (in Mushroom's case, a measly glass of wine in return for a history of customer loyalty) necessarily mean that you endorse and accept the apology?

From the restaurant manager's stand point, yes.

Should you leave it untouched just to show that you're unhappy,

Yes.

or take it for what it is -- a free glass of wine?

Why not? Perhaps it may happily make you 'get over it' and in the end only supplement a lovely meal.

If someone offers you a $100 gift certificate but you feel you deserve more, should you tear the certificate up or use it?

I'm with tommy. $100 is nothing I'd waive my nose at from any restaurant. See working in a restaurant, I understand that these things happen, as outlined above by Fat Guy. I don't need an invitation engraved in gold and presented on a silver tray with a white gloved, tuxedo'd person to make the apology any more valid.

I don't think drinking the wine was in any way unethical.

I never asserted it was unethical.

And I don't think he waived his right to an apology.

Again, I repeat myself, the glass of wine was the apology.

I never go into these situations wanting to get free stuff out if it. I'm sure people do, but most reasonable people don't.

You would be seriously surprised at how many folks come in and use all of their creativity to obtain a freebie that would otherwise not be offered. Really. I'll dig up our Manager's log and see within the last six months this has occurred.... I already did my email test to our restaurant and no one yet has read it.

If I complain, it means I worked up the guts to complain, and I want to be respected and taken seriously.

I complain to obtain satisfaction to a situation. I really don't care if I'm respected or taken seriously, just so that something is done to rectify whatever triggered the unsatisfactory results.

reesek · February 3, 2004

I don't need an invitation engraved in gold and presented on a silver tray with a white gloved, tuxedo'd person to make the apology any more valid.

beans that's totally unfair - i'm just asking to be treated with respect. it's really not too much to ask - clearly you disagree with me on what that means, but please don't make me out to be some kind of priss - i'm not.

beans · February 3, 2004

I don't need an invitation engraved in gold and presented on a silver tray with a white gloved, tuxedo'd person to make the apology any more valid.
beans that's totally unfair - i'm just asking to be treated with respect. it's really not too much to ask - clearly you disagree with me on what that means, but please don't make me out to be some kind of priss - i'm not.

I was in no way attributing that to you reesek, but using an extreme to illustrate a point.

My apologies that you presumed it to be a personal comment directed to your discomfort with obtaining a satisfactory response from that restaurant you patronised.

Pan · February 3, 2004

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."
If you said that after pouring tea on me or worse, I'd react angrily. I'm sure you disliked management at Disney.
Actually, I loved working for Disney.
And I wouldn't be so foolish as to pour tea on any of my guests, when I worked at Disney or currently.

But beans, don't tell me accidents that required an "I'm terribly sorry!" never happened there. You mean no-one ever poured or dropped anything on a patron? Or they did and said "I understand your concerns"?! :shock:

Exotic Mushroom · February 3, 2004

I don't need an invitation engraved in gold and presented on a silver tray with a white gloved, tuxedo'd person to make the apology any more valid.

But I think the problem that both reesek and I are having is that there was no apology. There was simply money thrown at the problem without an accompanying apology.

And for me, it is completely inconcievable that anyone would consider a free glass of wine to be an apology for a serious service error. It certainly never crossed my mind. I assumed that the wine was simply a gesture to mollify me until the manager could attend to the situation. If I had any idea that that was going to be their entire attempt at restitution, I would not have consumed it.

Perhaps there are different levels of service expected for different types of restaurants. beans, you apparently think that comping a glass of wine is adequate to make up for a forty five minute wait for service. Maybe it is, if that sort of thing happens often at the establishment in question. But if the standard of service is set higher, then the standards of correction should be higher as well. For example, where I work, I can only think of one time where something similar happened, and the whole place was up in arms all night trying to make the patrons feel better about their experience. I'm certain they were given free liquor, the manager spent a while talking to them, and in the kitchen we made up a bunch of special treats which the chef brought out to the table personally. We seriously regretted the error, we wanted them to know what an awful mistake we thought it was, and we did everything in our power to ensure that they would come away from the restaurant feeling good about the experience and wanting to return. Their patronage mattered to us, and we made sure they knew that.

Again, I repeat myself, the glass of wine was the apology.

The thing is, a glass of wine is not an apology. A $100 gift certificate is not an apology. Saying "I'm sorry," is an apology. That was all I wanted, and it never happened.

Edited February 3, 2004 by Exotic Mushroom (log)

tommy · February 3, 2004

The thing is, a glass of wine is not an apology. A $100 gift certificate is not an apology. Saying "I'm sorry," is an apology. That was all I wanted, and it never happened.

i'd rather have the glass of wine or the 100 bucks. i couldn't give a squat less if the bartender or host or manager feigns concern. and let's face it, that's all it is. i'd hate to think that egos are so delicate that they need that shallow stroking. (and no, i'm not addressing anyone on this thread)

Edited February 3, 2004 by tommy (log)

Sign In

restaurant etiquitte

Recommended Posts

Similar Content

Recently Browsing 0 members