Is it just me?

Okay, maybe it's because I'm old school but I really have an issue with someone referring to himself as a "Chef" when they have little or no experience. I busted my *** for many years before I earned the title of "Chef" and find it somewhat insulting that a culinary student or line cook has the audacity to call himself a chef. Is it just me being too sensitive over the belittling of my hard-earned title or do others have an issue with this too? Your thoughts please.
Again, just my opinion.....

I agree, I dont really make a big deal out of it, but I find it a little insulting sometimes...
There have been a couple times when I have interviewed people that say they are chefs, and they're backround experience is T.G.I.Fridays and Outback or something, again, there is nothing wrong with those jobs, and line cooks, prep boys, etc, but it is not a chef posion... So, I guess it kind of bothers me, but I try not to let it get to me.

I agree with you 100%...the KM where I work has addressed any man that works in the kitchen as "chef"..and then of course when I tell any one of them to do something, they look down their noses at me..because the KM/Chef has already told them numerous times that they are "chefs".

I finally got him to see that that was a huge mistake. I have 30 years experience, I am self trained, I have been a trainer for Stouffer Restaurants and I am currently the only one who works at my restaurant who can jump into anyone's shoes...and he has never addressed me in the same manner. No you are not being overly sensitive.

Welcome to the club. This is a N. American problem, as only in N. America a "chef" is any eejit in a poofy white hat, kinda like any eejit with a camera is a "professional photographer"... We have no trade qualifications that other (electricians, gas fitters, doctors, etc) trades use and that Gov'ts--both Federal and Porvincial/State will use to distinguish between eejits and real cooks. To compound the problem there are alot of schools that pump out "chefs"--not cooks mind you, but "Chefs", sometimes in as little as 3 months--with no previous industry experience required. Many schools feel that calling students "chef" encourages professional behavior, and once again, "cook" is a dirty word.

Deep down in the mire I think the "Chef" term was supposed to seperate the hash slingers from the other cooks. Problem is that in order to become a Chef, you need to become a competant cook, and "Cook" is a dirty word here in N. America.

On a llghter note, I hear that places like Apllbees now call they guy whyo dumps stuff in the deep fryer the "Drop-Chef", and it has become very chic to use "chef" as verb, as in "I chef at X's and I wear a Chef's coat when I'm cheffing"........

Dead Horse Tartare

This has been a well discussed topic here over the years. And my sage advice after watching people get very passionate about the subject for years and years is this: Call me whatever you want. Just enjoy my food and buy it.

I think it is more of an ignorance problem than a lack of respect problem...here is my story:

I just began culinary school...and am a career changer from the IT industry. My brother just received his MBA a few months ago. The other day, my brother asked me how "Chef School" was going...I corrected him by saying "Believe it or not, it is as much work as your CEO School you just graduated from".

I think he got the point.

On another note, have found that some culinary students seem to think that they are "above" certain tasks. In class, there are a handful of us who just roll up our sleeves and go do the dishes when they are piled up. The same group of people sweep and mop up at the end of class...there are a select group of students that have never done a dish, and never picked up a mop. I think it is those students that will come into the industry thinking that they are "Chefs"...I just hope they get weeded out in school before they make it to the real world because I dont want to be lumped into the same category as those fools.

Not all culinary students are ignorant enough to think that a piece of paper (that, most anyone can get, really) entitles you to be called "chef".

I make no big deal about it though becuase it is obvious that the have never stepped foot in a kitchen either...they are in for a rude awakening when they get their externship and refuse to do the dishes when the real Chef tells them to do them...I just hope I am in the same kitchen as these students when this happens...it will be fun to watch that train wreck!

Back when Novell began calling their certified technicians Netware Engineers there was a similar brouhaha from the college graduate type engineers.

No one owns the word and it has no legally restricted meaning and so anyone who wants can use it. Same with chef.

It boils down to if they can do what you need them to do regardless of title.

On the other side of equation, technical writer had/has a somewhat negative connotation because of a bunch of hack work some technical writers had performed. Many wanted to reinvent their title as if that would solve the problem of someone doing shoddy work. But it's still the same work and there's good people to be had from among the incompetent.

References are worth a lot.

Phil

The only thing you need to be a chef is to be the boss of the kitchen.

It doesn't take schooling or years of experience. If you've never worked in a kitchen in your life, you could buy a restaurant and become a chef tomorrow.

Chef means boss, thats all.



I do call certain people chef as a term of respect, even if i no longer work for them.

[quote=thetincook;186326]The only thing you need to be a chef is to be the boss of the kitchen.

It doesn't take schooling or years of experience. If you've never worked in a kitchen in your life, you could buy a restaurant and become a chef tomorrow.

Chef means boss, thats all.
quote]

Dang - you beat me to it....was reading the thread and was gonna say the same. Drats drats and double drats hehehe:lol:

And if the "Chef" has done just that, bought himself a kitchen with no previous experience, and proceeds to run it into the ground, do you have respect for him/her? Respect for the title?

Yes, I agree, Chef means Boss, but I won't work for anyone I don't respect. I might hate their guts, but if I can't respect their cooking or management style I won't work for them, because I don't respect them; just eejits in poofy white hats dragging our profession further into the mud.

Like I said, this is a typical N.American problem. We have stringent trade qualifications for electricians, plumbers, etc, but not for cooks. Think about it, how many private schools are there for other trades? Does the State of Alaska recognize a journeyman's ticket from the State of Maine? Does the C.I.A. recognize AFC credentials? Vice versa?

It's a mess, further perpetuated by Foodnetwork and some cheap cooking schools. It just isn't socially acceptable for these people/organizations to admit that a Chef MUST come from a competant cook.

Heck, even the AFC won't even use the word "cook", it's "culinarian", and judging from the material on their website, they don't lay too much emphasis on "cook", but there must be a dozen different classification for "Chefs".

Want respect for the term "Chef"? Here's the secret code, the quickest and most practical route, I call it the 4 T's code: "Trained Trainers Training the Trainees.

Same is true in my trade--plenty of idiots doing it, hacks. The good thing is that we who have some pride in what we do will make sure it's done right even if we have to ask for advice from another.

Well, since it's fashionable to tack on the title of "Chef" to just about any labor effort associated with preparing food (and just to make things interesting around my house), I'm may start referring to myself as the "Chef de Grain". :o

That's the guy in charge of pouring out dry cereal into bowls, and artistically (with a technical expertise developed over years of practice) slopping milk over the cereal...

I do empathise with those of you who have worked at developing your skills in the trade/craft to a level of competence where you can run all the elements of the kitchen under your domain, yet are beset by less experienced "technicians" who feel that they are entitled to command a job title that implies a certain level of respect... :(

Maybe I'll try out for the position of "Soup Chef"!!

(Nah, no Cheffin' way...) :crazy:

and my engineering title is *NOT* subject to discussion... :blush:

How many McDonald's chefs are there? The one who makes the fries. The one who flips the burgers. The one who toasts the bun. Wonderful that we have so many chefs in this world, eh? :D

to post a bit of devils advocate, i have seen a bit of lets call it reverse predjudice. People who were whats the word.. oh yes, "clasically trained" not giving the respect to those who came up through the trenches. I love the all too present question. "Where did you go to school?" as if by not going to school you are less of a chef. I have met some cullinary students from some of the top schools that would have been better off spending their tution on sometrhing else, who have the audacity to question another's merrit due to the fact that they chose to get paid to learn in place of paying to learn. There is a lot to what we do. I think that we all know who is who and who has what it takes. To **** with all the others. We are the psychos who miss 1st birtdays, own birtdays, Labor on Labor Day, and watch other families enjoy together time. Why? because you can do some pretty cool
$@!& with an egg, flour, milk and some water. that's all I give a **** about. Call me chef, call me cook call me jack *** i dont care. I just prefer my first name.

What it comes down to is, do your customers love your food? If they don't they won't stop by often. No matter what school you went to.

If they love your food then you are right on. I'm still not going to McD's unless I'm really hungry and not picky :D

I do, otherwise I'd find myself fired. There's no need to be insubordinate. You seem to be mistaking a chef to mean a good chef.

I like your 5T's foodpump.

DC Sunshine- Glad to be in good company.

As for all of the certification junkies out there, the only certificate we need is the food handling certificate. You're not going to endanger anyones life (except your own) if you put chocolate on sea scallops, but you will if you don't store it properly.

The most important trade qualification for a chef is his ability to generate income for the establishment. There are lots of ways to achieve this and they don't all start with years of experience in the kitchen.

On the brigade system, back in the old days there used to chefs de partie which were in charge of individual stations. So yes, you could have a grill chef or a soup chef, a fish chef, a veg chef, or even a "drop chef."

I like being a cook, I'm proud to be cook. It's just a pain to explain the difference, especially in social situations. It can really put a damper on the mood, so I just roll with it sometimes. (ooh, you're the chef de boudoir? How exciting!)

Also, please stop knocking all the "ejiits" getting into the industry. If not for them, I couldn't get cheap equipment at foreclosure auctions.

Good on ya, Tin. It's a question of what you can do and how well you do it.

The term "Chef" has been abused for a while now... I'm surprised people all of a sudden take offense to its misuse. I understand the amount of hard work that goes into earning the title, but why get frustrated over something that is going to happen and will not be stopping anytime soon.

In normal conversation with those outside of the biz, I get called chef all the time. I tried explaining the difference between cook & chef, but gave up.

I actually prefer to be called by first name and intend to keep it that way.

i don't know why you think its a dirty word in N america. its not...but in schools it probably is . because they want the kids money. to make money people will do anything. a.i. promising they will be a chef after school. thats why I think hands on experence is way better than schools, for the most part. you have someone in most cases that will teach you how to get from point a to point b.

Its just my opionion tincook, but I strongly disagree. By your statement, there can only be one chef per kitchen quota?

You are not the chef until someone calls you chef.

lololol......right to the point Kuan!
how many chefs on this site (that are the end of the line in a food establishment) would occasionally like to be a follower?

Not at all. It depends on how your business is setup.

Take a large hotel for instance
-You've got the chef in charge of the coffe shop
-You've got the chef in charge of the fancy restaurant
-You've got the chef in charge of banquets and catering.
-Then you've got the exec chef in charge of all three.

Even though they may use the same kitchen at times they're still chefs.

Chef is a managment position. You can have one in charge each profit/loss center if you want.

As far your question about only one chef per kitchen:
You can have two managers at the same level, with the same direct reports, responsible for the same things at the same time, but it sounds like a recipe for conflict and needless redundancy. How many bosses are in your kitchen?

Or possibly I'm missing your point. I'm not exactly sure what you're disagreeing with.

or more than two per room, we are open 24 hours a day,days ,swing,and grave we have four chefs. the exec chef, the asst exec(me),head baker, and the asst. chef.we run the baked goods and pasteries for 10 outlets.

it is an on going battle to keep communication between chefs,so everyone knows what happened when and why.

It's true that a Chef must a be a good manager, and in order to survive, generate a profit, but no, he/she must actually KNOW how to cook.

If the Chef thinks that poaching is to drop a cracked egg into boiling water, odds are that the whole kitchen can't poach properly either. If the Chef figures that "saute" means to toss par-cooked pasta in a ready-made tomato sauce, odds are that the whole kitchen understands that that process is incorrectly called "Sauteing". Basically the leader, the boss, the chef, whatever you call him must understand any job thoroughly before he gives that job to his/her subordinates. If he doesn't, he can't inspect the job properly either because he/she doesn't have the full understanding of it. Incompetance, I think it's called. This is why armies around the world , since the concept of war, have had boot camps, and selected officers only from those who finished boot camp. If they didn't, they'd have lousy officers, alot of dead men and a few mutinys on their hands.

But I digress, badly...Like I said this is a typicaly N.American problem. In Europe cooking is a respected trade, and acknowledged by federal Gov'ts. To become a cook you must complete an apprenticeship, there are very few private cooking schools, and those that are are not geared for professionals. The apprenticeship is viewed as a a seconary education, like highschool, so there are standardized tests, resulting in that the book learning is the same for every apprentice. Apprentices can only work under those who have succesfully completed THEIR apprenticeship. Trained elephants training the trainees. What you have now is a level playing field, very consistant education, and from this you can go on your way to becoming a Chef, or as high as you want.

Compare this to N.America where you can work anywhere you want to, with no guarantees that that Chef actually knows what they're doing. You might work at a high-end steak house and learn how to grill and saute but have no idea how to braise or poele. Or you could go to a cooking school, many are private run. But there is no consistancy BETWEEN these schools, what is curriculum for one school is not curricculum for another, what is acceptable standards for once school is not acceptable for another.

There are no national standards.

This is the problem.

That's sort of what I was trying to say.

This reminds me a lot of a topic that sprung up back in February. http://www.cheftalk.com/forums/culin...lled-chef.html

Funny how quickly this one did explode tho. LOL

Like most, when I was younger in the career, Title meant the world. Stars were in the eye's and......Then I was slapped very abruptly upside the head. Good thing too! For some reason I always felt some discomfoirt in being called Chef. Not because I never earned the title but because I remember the people that wore the title before me. Somehow, in my own eye's, I always paled in comparison. But as I matured in the profession I finally began to understand exactly what being called a Chef meant. So I gradually accepted it but never really overcame the prior feelings.

There have only been a couple times in my life where I actually stressed the title but if you can imagine there were some pretty extenuating circumstances surrounding that statement.

I know I've stated this before but I believe it is worth repeating. None the less here are my beliefs on what it means or when it is proper to being called a Chef.

Rant over, soap box tucked neatly under cabinet.

Another thing to add, I am sure that at some point in all our lives, we have offended someone else similarly by ignorance/lack of knowledge.

foodpump what is poele?

I've been cooking @ home now for about 5 years or so.. Certain family members always refer to me as "Chef" - It makes me upset when they do that as I have a profound respect for what a "Chef" really is... and I ask them repeatedly to stop calling me that..

Most folks don't realize that the term "Chef" is much more than someone who can cook.. it's a mastery of the art of food if you will and I know I'm far from ever being in the same league as any true "Chef"...