Michelin 2007

[erica graham]

We are tiny, but only take cash tips, no service charge, and the tips get equally shared out throughout the staff (including wash ups etc) once a week. As the majority of the staff are full time and on salary, this keeps it fair and transparent. Personally, I prefare our higher wage percentage and clear conscience regarding service charge- especially as out of London it is not seen as acceptable, and as when I worked as a waiter, I never believed that tips or service charge were shared fairly, and was proved right on many occassions.

The staff much prefare this, as the tips jar is glass, everyone can see whats happening (in fact they do the sharing out!!), and our staff have been with us between 3 years and 9 years, so I can see that it works for us!!

[TheBacchus]

Sorry you're absolutely right - i neglected to say that there is a minimum threshold for wages so should it ever be the case (please god never) that we have an empty restaurant then the FoH staff would all get there wage topped up to make it an acceptable (and legal!) amount

RE hours we run a lunch service M-F from 12-3 and dinner 6-12.

I'll give you an example - lunch today

Very quiet with only 20 in and average spend per head around £50 - takings = £1000 therefore 12.5% service = £125. There is FoH manager on a salary plus 2 servers who will share the £125 plus £20 for working the shift (lunch is £20 and dinner £30)

Total earnings for them today = £82.50 each before tax amd NI equivalent of £10 per hour

Dinner tonight we are fully booked with 75 covers - same process means a likely service charge of £468.75 to be divided between staff (75 covers @ £50 per head)

We have 7 servers working so each would get around £30 + £66.90

Total earnings for waiters tonight = around£96.90 each before tax and NI. They will start at 4 and work til about 1am

I think this is entirely fair and we have even given the staff a say on it and they voted to keep the system as it is.

As far as i'm concerned they earn the service charge and as far as paying customers are concerned i think they are far happier knowing that if they pay the service that is going to the hard work of their waiter rather than lining the pockets of the owner.

Unfortunately there are some businesses that abuse this and thats sad

I think people know me well enough by now to know how open i am about these things. I am so because i think it is the only way that more people will become educated on this side of the industry and it will, hopefully, improve the quality of restaurants and standards of the industry in this country.

It still amazes me when you go to France and some other countries and see the job as a career whereas we still see it as a job for students and back-packers...

[nikkib]

Or people that call it the "service" industry not hospitality I don't see my career as a "service" A big part of the problem is that in Britain we still as a whole, look down on these people "serving us" rather than appreciating and enjoying their hospitality. Like you say in France/Italy etc this is a well regarded career where as people over here seem to think that we fall into it because we can't do anything else.

[Matthew Grant]

Sorry you're absolutely right - i neglected to say that there is a minimum threshold for wages so should it ever be the case (please god never) that we have an empty restaurant then the FoH staff would all get there wage topped up to make it an acceptable (and legal!) amount

RE hours we run a lunch service M-F from 12-3 and dinner 6-12.

I'll give you an example - lunch today

Very quiet with only 20 in and average spend per head around £50 - takings = £1000 therefore 12.5% service = £125.  There is FoH manager on a salary plus 2 servers who will share the £125 plus £20 for working the shift (lunch is £20 and dinner £30)

Total earnings for them today = £82.50 each before tax amd NI equivalent of £10 per hour

Dinner tonight we are fully booked with 75 covers - same process means a likely service charge of £468.75 to be divided between staff (75 covers @ £50 per head)

We have 7 servers working so each would get around £30 + £66.90

Total earnings for waiters tonight = around£96.90 each before tax and NI.  They will start at 4 and work til about 1am

I think this is entirely fair and we have even given the staff a say on it and they voted to keep the system as it is.

As far as i'm concerned they earn the service charge and as far as paying customers are concerned i think they are far happier knowing that if they pay the service that is going to the hard work of their waiter rather than lining the pockets of the owner. 

Unfortunately there are some businesses that abuse this and thats sad

I think people know me well enough by now to know how open i am about these things.  I am so because i think it is the only way that more people will become educated on this side of the industry and it will, hopefully, improve the quality of restaurants and standards of the industry in this country.

It still amazes me when you go to France and some other countries and see the job as a career whereas we still see it as a job for students and back-packers...

←

So you use tips to make up the shortfall in wages to bring them up to (at least) minimum levels? Isn't this the same as a tronc? (Note I'm not judging this... at least not yet )

[TheBacchus]

No. How could we use tips to bring up the level of wages? If the situation ever occurred that we had to top up someones wages the reason would be because there are no tips. If 2 waiters worked on a monday night and there were no customers we would still pay them the equivalent of £6.50 per hour for the hours they have worked

All money comes into the company bank account from the credit card company including the 12.5% service charge that gets added to your bill.

At this point a lot of restaurants will simply keep the service charge and pay the staff £6 per hour * hours worked. The staff are taxed and end up with a net amount.

We dont. We work out the share of service charge that each member of staff has EARNT and we add to it what equates to minimum wage. They are taxed as normal in the correct manner and end up with a net amount. It simply works out more favourably for the staff this way

Think about it. If i hired a waiter and paid them £6.50 per hour and they worked 40 hours in a week. Thats £260 per week. I then take 12.5% service charge from all my customers and split this up between all the waiters. If we take £20,000 in a week thats £2500 worth of service charge.

Divided by 6 waiters and they would be on £36,000 per year.....i dont think there are many waiters earning that in Britain!

So whats the alternative? Well surely that would be the business keeping most of the service charge because there's no way that restaurants who pay their staff an hourly rate give them all the service charge so they must keep it themselves for the business no?

If you look upthread you'll see thats where this discussion started - how much of the 12.5% service that most restaurants charge these days goes to the staff. Well, in our case, the answer is all of it.

Is that not a good thing?

Edited January 26, 2007 by TheBacchus (log)

[ravelda]

Having seen the multitude of ways that different restaurants pay, I think that is very fair Phil - and I imagine your staff are all pretty happy with it too!

David

[Matthew Grant]

I'm not disagreeing that it is a good thing that all tips go to the staff. I was simply querying whether using tips to top up to the minimum required salary is the same as a tronc, I can't see much difference?

[TheBacchus]

I'm not disagreeing that it is a good thing that all tips go to the staff. I was simply querying whether using tips to top up to the minimum required salary is the same as a tronc, I can't see much difference?

←

Matthew sorry - i've just re-read my ramblings and i didnt make it clear you are quite right.

The £30 is based on per hourly rate. ie. 6 hour shift You cant pay less than minimum wage and then use the service charge to make up the difference (although i know of several that do!!)

Anyway, a bit off thread now so sorry...

Edited January 26, 2007 by TheBacchus (log)

[nikkib]

phew glad thats sorted then! so Michelin...................................

What would be your top recommendation on Michelin 1* in london then? Mine would have been Petrus but now its up to 2* So i'm curious as to which restaurant would come out top and bottom for that matter?

[ravelda]

Hmm - tough call, for me there is not one, it depends on what I fancy. My favourites are probably:

Claridges

Tom Aikens

La Noisette

L'Atelier (albeit a cosly choice)

And Nobu (although the fact that I proposed to my wife here obviously maks it even more appealing to me)

[nikkib]

least favourite?

[BertieWooster]

The worst Michelin starred place in the UK could get some debate...

[nikkib]

Alright lets hear it.....

[ravelda]

Least favourite - now there is a question! I think two of the most undeserving ar the Glasshouse in Kew and the Mirabelle!

[BertieWooster]

I've already said mine, Box Tree and Mr UNderhill's. No conception of why either has a star (or is still in business come to that)

[TheBacchus]

Based on experience alone last year - Gary Rhodes least favourite

[naebody]

Least favourite - now there is a question!  I think two of the most undeserving ar the Glasshouse in Kew and the Mirabelle!

←

Was at Mirabelle yesterday, as it happens. Despite serving asparagus in January, there was nothing specifically wrong with the food, and there's a certain "I'm ready for my closeup, Mr Pierre White" faded glamour about the room (providing you mentally subtract all the portly businessmen treating their Eastern European nieces to dinner). But the suggestion that it is in the same grade as somewhere like Aikens is absurd.

I guess the problem with Michelin is that there is an ever-increasing number of one-star places, because they tend to follow chefs around when they switch venues. At the same time, it doesn't take away stars very often because doing so tends to trigger backlash/recrimination/suicides etc. That means you have a constant dilution of the baseline standard. Meanwhile, the next grade up remains the preserve of places that iron your napkin, floss your bum before you sit down, keep your wine in the opposite corner and bring shotglasses of snot and bile between the courses.

[Matthew Grant]

After various discussions comparing 1* restaurants with other 1* restaurants etc. It's been suggested to me that you simply can't do this otherwise you end up with ridiculous situations such as a one star pub getting compared to Claridges or Aikens. What you need to do is compare like with like, so compare the 1 *pub with another 1* pub and the one star French place with another 1* French place, it doesn't stop all the arguments but it certainly starts to make more sense.

Subsequently a restaurant like Arbutus getting a star is understandable as Michelin recognising the rise of the Bistro de Luxe type of restaurant. It's happened before with Indian (Tamarind), Thai (Nahm) Japanese (Nobu), Chinese (Hakkasan) cuisine and they led the way for other restaurants in their area of cooking to get a star. I fully expect to see other restaurants (Galvin perhaps) in this area obtain a star in the future.

[ravelda]

I think you are right Matthew - I have always looked at a star as being recognition to a restaurant for consistantly producing food and giving service which is the best amongst it peers in wahtever category that is - whether fine dining French or pub.

[beepop]

I think you are right Matthew - I have always looked at a star as being recognition to a restaurant for consistantly producing food and giving service which is the best amongst it peers in wahtever category that is - whether fine dining French or pub.

←

okay, on that basis....

there is a pie shop in walton-on-the-naze in essex. They do two pies, all served with mash and peas. Drink offering is basic and averages psend per family of four is £25. They make the pies every morning, starting at 4am. They have a farmer who naturally rears the meat specifically for them, another who grows potatoes specifically for them and another peas (which they freeze themselves for use in winter). The team in the kitchen are split between what they are good at - one mash, one peas, one pastry tops, one meat.

They open at 11am and close at 5pm and serve approx 2000 people per week in peak time (seats about 50 people). All the staff have worked there from year dot, are well paid and happy within themselves. What they do is exceedingly good for what it is. If you were passing and needed someone to eat, you would be happy to have eaten there.

Are they in Michelin. No. They are not even recognised by anyone. But take my word for it, they are exceedingly good at what they do. So I think comparing like for like is important, but one has to accept that one should not get bogged down in Michelin as there are lots of good places not in it, in it without comendation and in it with comendation that is above what the likes of say Harden's, Jay Rayner, Terry Durack, Matthew Norman, Good Food Guide, AA Guide. In the age of egullet and other reference to web opinions, it seems Michelin is being used as a league table/ofsted guide...in that those that subscribe to it think it is great and reliable and those that don't, don't bother with it but rely on what they see/witness for themselves. Which is why I get so irate when I here people say 'I'm was/a Michelin starred chef so I know what's best.'

As for most undeserved Michelin star my vote goes to The New Angel in Darthmouth, two stars Midsummer House Cambridge and three stars...haven't eaten in any! Bib is the Mistley Thorne.

And finally, someone asked me to give examples of Italian/French not rocgnised by Michelin over England - Chateau de Montreuil, France and Matricianella, Piazza San Lorenzo, Rome.

[algy]

I've only eaten at Nahm once, but couldn't see (or more importantly taste) anything that deserved a star. The only thing that was stellar was the bill.

[Scott]

As for most undeserved Michelin star my vote goes to The New Angel in Darthmouth, two stars Midsummer House Cambridge and three stars...haven't eaten in any! Bib is the Mistley Thorne.

Really?

I thought it was one of the best restaurants I've been to in ages.

[ravelda]

beepop, welcome to the forum. I would usually spend a bit of time putting down a decent rationale in response to your post, but I really don;t think I need to. At the end of the day, I am talking about restaurants you are talking about a pie shop - no matter how good it is, it isn't going to be michelin star!

[Matthew Grant]

I've only eaten at Nahm once, but couldn't see (or more importantly taste) anything that deserved a star. The only thing that was stellar was the bill.

←

I haven't been for years but not long after it first opened I had a stunning meal there which got me so excited I remember saying to the other half that it would be the first Thai Michelin starred restaurant - and so it was.

I wonder if Michelin, having opened up to other genres are loathe to take away the star if there is no other restaurant in that area to take it's place? There have never been any other starred Michelin Thai places and it would leave that area void again if it was removed. Maybe they should try out Mantanah in South Norwood, at least deserving of a Bib if my last meal in December was anything to go by

Edited January 27, 2007 by Matthew Grant (log)

[naebody]

At the end of the day, I am talking about restaurants you are talking about a pie shop - no matter how good it is, it isn't going to be michelin star!

←

Frankly, the "why don't they recognise this chippie/pie shop/greasy spoon" kind of critisism is a rod Michelin has made for its own back. Remember, the whole guide was intended for travellers to gauge whether they would be prepared to burn tire rubber for lunch (because, in the scheme of things, tires are considerably important to Michelin than food). Just look how they define the categories:

*** Exceptional cuisine, worth a special journey.

** Excellent cooking, worth a detour.

* A very good restaurant in its category.

I think the confusion begns with the phrase "in its category". If a pie shop really is the best option in the category of "places the hungry traveller can eat when passing through Walton-on-the-Naze", why shouldn't it be recognised?

Of course. we accept that the red book doesn't work like that any more. But, given its editors presist with the "in its category" definition, can anyone venture to suggest why there are stars for three French-ish places within a few streets of each other in Soho (L'Escargot, Lindsay House and Arbies), yet it fails to find a single restaurant in Glasgow worth even a bib? *

(* snide answers not appreciated.)

Edited January 27, 2007 by naebody (log)