ROCK> me <HARDPLACE

[Rivitman]

I guess I'll set the stage:

I'm a Sous chef at at an event facility with the total capacity of about 4k.

The volume is substantial, and we cater out also.

Of course the holidays are coming, (most chaotic time of the year) and I have 2 cooks quit with a third probable. (out of 6)

The Chef, who is also my friend, has been giving me heck. (worse actually, but this board filters bad words) Our relationship is pretty straightforward. He tells me what to do, and I do it.Always. But now I'm catching flak over things that really don't mean anything, and the slightest expression of disagreement sets him off.

He is very demanding which I accept, but naturally this means me applying pressure on the crew, which they resent. Many of them are already upset over wage/hour issues (low on one or both).

No matter what, they see me as one of them, and not a manager. At heart, I AM one of them, but that's beside the point. I seem to not be able to get the kind of response the exec does.

Chef got angry with me because I disagreed with some personnel issues, and after a day and a half of the silent treatment from him, we had it out.

I didn't quit (I'm loyal).
I didn't get fired. (Lucky? Valued?)

Many good chefs are control freaks and my chef is very good.
But unfortunatly, this undermines my own authority, for every virtually decision I make is changed, many times arbitrarily. Work assignments, production plans, scheduals, the works. I have never failed to do as he demanded. Ever.

It's ok for the Chef to be upset, but not me. Sorry, but I'm merely flesh and blood.

The crew see me as a sock puppet. Chef has a bad habit of telling me what to tell each crew member to do, in earshot (or better, with them standing right there), then having me tell them again.
Chef drives himself to burnout and poor health, and I can't get him to just go home and let me handle it. I am very capable of doing so. I think. When he does this, I'm not so sure.
The downward pressure applied on me gets applied to the crew, I can't help that, I'm pretty stressed out trying to keep them under control and keep chef happy.

Now they are bailing out. Wages and hours(total worked) issues get them angry, then they start taking potshots at the nearest target, me.

I don't cook enough some say. True. The reason I refrain from doing what I like best is so that they can make some income. I could pick any three and fire them, and do it all myself, no problem most of the year.

So for my thoughtfulness I get no credit.

They dont like my temper. If I show them and tell them three times what to do and they still screw it up, and the chef rakes me over the coals? Sorry, they get it from me. I don't like it. Sometimes it's calculated, sometimes I'm just upset. Then I go home a feel bad.

This has predictably, had bad effects on my health and outlook. Therefore, I will simply stop.

I have talked to most and this is my plan:

A cook that screws up is resposible. No more protection from me, no reminders, no follow up. Nothing. They get told/shown ONCE. I do QA their work, but It's simply impossible to see everything before it goes out. If chef wants to give me some lumps I'll take them, pointing a big, fat, calloused finger at the offender all the time.

I'm also going to go back on the line, produce as much as possible, and take as much money out of the crew's pockets as possible. Every one of them knows I can throw down serious volume and quaility. Maybe they need a reminder.

I am quite angry with the quitters. They also have a point. Our wages suck and we offer no benefits. It's a tough place, and a tough kitchen, lots of chaos.
I'm a symptom, not the disease.

I tell chef that our place has exactly the staff that the ownership is willing to pay for, no more, no less.

IF we can hire replacements, I'm faced with a raging chef, uncaring ownership, a goofball GM, a disconnected and discourteous sales/contract department, AND having to babysit a few newbies during the busyest, most taxing and aggrivating time of year.

Happy Holidays. Shoot me please. Riv.

[jaunDiego]

I can't believe that you are a bonefide Sous Chef and whinning like a little girl like this. You are "middle management", bro. Your job is to be the a-hole when the Chef doesn't have time. Your cooks are giving you crap? Tell them to work faster and be more efficient...then SHOW THEM HOW! Lead by example and kick a*s and take names. There is no room for cry babies in this buisness. Show your Chef your loyalty by firing the first cook to give you "...'da buisness" about your asking him/her to do their d*mn job. Start chopping some d*mn heads off and maybe you'll get their f'ing attention! Your Chef wants to be reassured that you are the right person for the job based on how you DIRECT the crew. If you fail at that, your head is the next one to hit the floor with low "clumping" noise.

Originally Posted by Rivitman

I guess I'll set the stage:

I'm a Sous chef at at an event facility with the total capacity of about 4k.

The volume is substantial, and we cater out also.

Of course the holidays are coming, (most chaotic time of the year) and I have 2 cooks quit with a third probable. (out of 6)

The Chef, who is also my friend, has been giving me heck. (worse actually, but this board filters bad words) Our relationship is pretty straightforward. He tells me what to do, and I do it.Always. But now I'm catching flak over things that really don't mean anything, and the slightest expression of disagreement sets him off.

He is very demanding which I accept, but naturally this means me applying pressure on the crew, which they resent. Many of them are already upset over wage/hour issues (low on one or both).

No matter what, they see me as one of them, and not a manager. At heart, I AM one of them, but that's beside the point. I seem to not be able to get the kind of response the exec does.

Chef got angry with me because I disagreed with some personnel issues, and after a day and a half of the silent treatment from him, we had it out.

I didn't quit (I'm loyal).
I didn't get fired. (Lucky? Valued?)

Many good chefs are control freaks and my chef is very good.
But unfortunatly, this undermines my own authority, for every virtually decision I make is changed, many times arbitrarily. Work assignments, production plans, scheduals, the works. I have never failed to do as he demanded. Ever.

It's ok for the Chef to be upset, but not me. Sorry, but I'm merely flesh and blood.

The crew see me as a sock puppet. Chef has a bad habit of telling me what to tell each crew member to do, in earshot (or better, with them standing right there), then having me tell them again.
Chef drives himself to burnout and poor health, and I can't get him to just go home and let me handle it. I am very capable of doing so. I think. When he does this, I'm not so sure.
The downward pressure applied on me gets applied to the crew, I can't help that, I'm pretty stressed out trying to keep them under control and keep chef happy.

Now they are bailing out. Wages and hours(total worked) issues get them angry, then they start taking potshots at the nearest target, me.

I don't cook enough some say. True. The reason I refrain from doing what I like best is so that they can make some income. I could pick any three and fire them, and do it all myself, no problem most of the year.

So for my thoughtfulness I get no credit.

They dont like my temper. If I show them and tell them three times what to do and they still screw it up, and the chef rakes me over the coals? Sorry, they get it from me. I don't like it. Sometimes it's calculated, sometimes I'm just upset. Then I go home a feel bad.

This has predictably, had bad effects on my health and outlook. Therefore, I will simply stop.

I have talked to most and this is my plan:

A cook that screws up is resposible. No more protection from me, no reminders, no follow up. Nothing. They get told/shown ONCE. I do QA their work, but It's simply impossible to see everything before it goes out. If chef wants to give me some lumps I'll take them, pointing a big, fat, calloused finger at the offender all the time.

I'm also going to go back on the line, produce as much as possible, and take as much money out of the crew's pockets as possible. Every one of them knows I can throw down serious volume and quaility. Maybe they need a reminder.

I am quite angry with the quitters. They also have a point. Our wages suck and we offer no benefits. It's a tough place, and a tough kitchen, lots of chaos.
I'm a symptom, not the disease.

I tell chef that our place has exactly the staff that the ownership is willing to pay for, no more, no less.

IF we can hire replacements, I'm faced with a raging chef, uncaring ownership, a goofball GM, a disconnected and discourteous sales/contract department, AND having to babysit a few newbies during the busyest, most taxing and aggrivating time of year.

Happy Holidays. Shoot me please. Riv.

[Rivitman]

I totally agree with you juan.
100%.
And I have been doing exactly as you describe, for over a year now, with good results up to a two months ago.

Problem is, my being an @hole is now being cited as a primary reason for staff losses.

I have become a convienent excuse.
As to firing, if you have read some of my past post, you would know I have made that happen too.

Being a cook in our place basically means working like a slave for chump change. The janitors make more than highly skilled cooks.Thats the real problem, and nobody wants to admit it.

In the local area, cooks are in demand, even mediocre ones. Even bad ones.We are simply not competetive anymore. Our unhappy staff has plenty of options.

I can be whatever kind of sous you or anybody tells me to be. If my staff can't pay the rent or buy food, they will leave. The state of denial over wages and hours has nothing to do with me. I refuse to be scapegoated as a poor excuse for the desire for discount labor.

[foodnfoto]

Rivitman

Do you guys ever have staff meetings?

A lot of times, grumbling by hourly staff can be alleviated by giving them a chance to voice their grievances to those that have the power to address them (or not.) At least the suits can give them a clear reason for their low wages.
Meetings are also helpful for clarifying production standards-all at once, all at the same time so there is no cofusion or "Chef said to do it this way" "no, Sous said that way". You can also make a clear plan for what you want to happen on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. Another useful thing about these meetings is that work and authority roles become clear to everyone.

Of course, you must collaborate with the chef and the suits as to what roles are and how you need info and authority to be disseminated. That way you are not undermining each other unintentionally. If it is intentional on either part, well, that's a whole other can of worms.

Just an idea, but it sounds to me like the operation has two problems.
1) Communication (top-down, and bottom-up) is unclear and inconsistent.
2) Standards of performance are ill defined and without clear consequences for non-compliance. "If you don't do better, you're fired" is a not specific enough, a poor motivation technique, as well as unrealistic when faced with the larger recuitment competition problem. Try to enlist the efforts of the hourly staff to solve the obvious problems and setting priorities for which ones to address first.


In most cases it's more cost effective to redefine and retrain than to hire and train anew. On average, it takes an investment of at least 90 days to train a new recruit as a replacement for even a marginal experienced staffer.

Let's see, how many days until the holiday party season begins?

[Rivitman]

There is no bottom up communication. The ownership and GM are stone deaf to the chef, myself, and the entire kitchen. The never even come in to look.

One on one, each employee will bring issues up. As a group, they go mute, because they know neither I nor the chef can do anything about wages, hours, or benefits.

My collaberation with the chef is limited to me doing exactly as he wishes. There is no good cop/bad cop.
His role is anything he wishes it to be at the moment; that's his right.
But he fails to understand how he undermines his own sous.

Today, I continued one on one interviews to gain insight.

True, my crew don't like it when I'm tough on them or yell. But for all but the very young, wages, hours, and working conditions usually get much higher attention on their problems list.

This is unlikely to change. Our shop is a revolving door, and no matter how I try to explain that retention of trained, qualified employees is a cheaper alternative, chef and I are powerless to make it happen. Thus, we start from scratch with each new hire.

We ran an ad for two weeks for cooks a few months back and recieved exactly five applications, only one of whom was qualified, and he's one of the ones leaving. Locally, we have a very bad rep as a workplace in the community of cooks and chefs.
Example: This place has chewed up and spat out 10 executive chefs in 14 years of operation. Well over a hundred sous chefs, cooks and dishwashers.

We will deal with it, but it's old. Worse, it's totally unnecessary.

So I'm changing my personal style to deal with the criticisms. This is they way it's going to stay, and if my friend the chef doesn't like the result, what happens next is his call. I'll deal with it either way.

[kuan]

10 execs in 14 years? Try to get to the bottom of what's up with chef. He might be real unhappy. My guess is he's thinking real hard about leaving.

If you play your cards right, you're it, or you will be until a new chef gets hired.

[Rivitman]

He is unhappy. He does want to leave.
I believe the problem he deals with is twofold:
Age discrimination, and a high salary requirement.
He certainly delivers results for whomever he works, there is zero doubt about that.
Our one lung, crippled operation adds big money to the owners bottom line, a lot of it. In spite of them. Sooner or later his fortunes will change, and my intent is to exit as soon as he does. Although I am capable, and can run the operation, I'm no substitute for his capabilities and decades of experience over the long haul. Only this has allowed him to cope at all. He has many tricks, and uses them all. Of course, I apsorb it all like a sponge.

I'm not interested in being the exec here, at any price. Putting myself on that casualty list of ex-chefs is not on my short list of career goals. My past experiences tell me to never take an exec or sous job again (done both). If income were not an issue, I'd just cook. But I'm trying not to let my current experieince sour me on the industry. I'll take on my own kitchen and crew again at some point. Very carefully.

[foodpump]

Remember that old Dire Straits song, " Industrial Disease"? That's what the place has.

Chef of the year, 4k+ capacity, hungry owners, lousy staff attitudes, lousy pay, etc. When you start cooking and taking away the hours from the cooks things'll get worse, and then Joe, who left a few weeks ago will get a bunch of cooks to come over to here he works, and then your Chef will have either a constant face like a rotten strawberry, or be in intensive care at the local hospital. Can't get any decent cooks if you don't pay what you need, top brass won't pay, so the only way to survive is to rely even more on finished products and cheaper cooks. Industrial disease....

If you're in tight with the Chef, tell him openly and frankly that you'll be at his side at his next post. Plan your escape together. Just my two cents...

[Jacaranda]

You say:

Our shop is a revolving door...
Locally, we have a very bad rep as a workplace in the community of cooks and chefs...
The ownership and GM are stone deaf to the chef, myself, and the entire kitchen. They never even come in to look...
It's a tough place, and a tough kitchen, lots of chaos...
I'm faced with a raging chef, uncaring ownership, a goofball GM, a disconnected and discourteous sales/contract department...

What's keeping you there? If the owners aren't prepared to invest in their employees, then you will quickly reach a point beyond which enjoyment of your job and development of your career are impossible. The way I read your comments, you've reached that point.

Run; run far, run fast. And find the job that you deserve, in an organisation where the kitchen is respected.

[Rivitman]

I stay out of loyalty to my chef. He's done me a couple of good turns in the past. He befriended me when I needed a friend. I have learned a lot from him.

But business is business. He will cut my throat in a second if I don't deliver.
As I have high expectations for myself, I find that arrangement acceptable. But his personal and work issues are weighing heavily on him right now, which translates to making my life very difficult for me.

He's trapped at the moment, and abandoning him in the trap wouldn't be right. But he's exploring my limits right nowto the point where I'm loosing it.

[foodpump]

Didn't say for you to abandon him. First rule in physics, politics, and military is that the fecal matter moves in a downward motion. If you're in a lousy postion, he's in an even worse one. Last time I was in a position like yours,(11 years ago) my Chef died of um, neck injuries, self inflicted ones... There were alot of other factors involved, but the main ones (at work) were the same ones you listed in your first problem, I call it Industrial disease.


Like I said, talk to him frankly and tell him that if and when he moves, you will be there with him. No one can view this statement as a threat or even as bad news, only a sign of loyalty.

[Rivitman]

We have discussed it at length for a year now.
He knows I'll stand with him. And go with him.
He also knows that in any sort of battle with the ownership or GM, they can simply count me out as any sort of alternative.

I just wish he'd climb down off my back long enough for me to help him. He has great ability to rachet up the tension level, mine especially. I then react in response. And I have not figured out a way to react that mollifies him that doesn't yank everbody's chain and puts the whole kitchen on tilt. Buy he's angry with me.

The difference with me, is that if I get angry with a cook, it's over at the end of the day. Forever. Next day, clean slate.
Chef gets mad at someone, and it's seemingly never over. And he's mad at me.

I'm violating all sorts of personal rules about work for him that I have developed to maintain my own happiness over the years:

Never work a job that makes you feel stupid.

Never work a job that puts you in a position of hassling good subordinates.

Never work a job where politics is more important than results.

Never work a job where money is your sole motivation and focus.

Never work a job where forced into responibilty for outcomes where you have no control.

Perhaps all I can do is (try to) maintain my composure until january.The first six weeks of the year the place goes dead, More cooks will quit because they won't get enough hours to live on. And once again, the circle will be complete.

[foodpump]

You're in deep. If Chef knows he can rely on you, and you won't be salivating over his job, it does make things wee bit better.

But like you said, the place goes through about 1 Chef a year, and I can only assume that your Chef is under great pressure. You're his right hand man, so you get it too, and I guess the only thing right now is to suck it up. And as that dirty "C"word (Christmas...) comes closer and closer the pressure will really be on, if he blows his top once too often there won't be anyone left in the kitchen. I feel for you, both.

From what you describe of the owners and F & B, and what you describe of the natural "lull" in January, looks like they'll stage the coup and plant in a new Chef about then. Heck, they may be greedy, but they ain't stupid, they'll milk all they can out of you when the milking's good (Christmas), then get rid of the cow. Like I said before, start planning an escape route, now. The planning will be the only way to deal with the pressure.

[Rivitman]

You are very perceptive foodpump.
January is traditional firing time for chefs here, but the owners problem is that my chef adds so much to the bottom line with so few rescources, they may as well close shop. It would be the stupidest thing they have ever done, but I wouldn't put it past them. Stupid is their stock in trade.
And my chef is definatly under great pressure both at home and work.

Things seemed on an even keel today with some important functions going smoothly. Maybe I made my point, maybe not. He would never admit it anyway.
But as long as I'm going home not feeing wrapped around the axel, I can deal with the rest.

[RETREVR]

Part of the chef's job is to deal with staffing problems. Seems like he needs to know what percentage his labor is running. If it is really low, he should confront the GM about wages. Low labor is great, as long as you can keep the staff to get the job done. Low labor should be addresses in this situation, because keeping a good staff, or hiring a quality staff, has become impossible. Pay should be competitive in the market you are in...no more, no less. You are seeing the market at work.
Your chef is in a real pickle if his labor is already running high. This leaves him few cards. Either the staff is being mis-managed or the menu pricing is off.
My GM gets nervous with a large staff, but paying everyone 30-40 hours a week is better than paying huge overtime on too few people.
If everyone is getting overtime, it might be usefull for the chef to give the gm a math lesson to show him that paying slightly higher wages to a bigger staff will save him money by eliminating overtime.
You and the chef have more power before the holidays than you will in January. Push now.
You are nice to the staff and they quit on you. A lot of good that did you. Empathy and being human is needed, but don't forget your position as sous. There is always some good chef/bad chef chemistry. Something has gone wrong if they are quitting on you in numbers. There are always quitters in a group, but half the staff? As sous, you never want to loosen the staff too much by being friendly. It only sets them up for failure.
Some people will stick around if the food is good, the environment is good, and the reputation is good. Young cooks often thrive if they are learning or gaining responibility that they would not get elsewhere. There is often a mindset that "I can make better money down the street but it might suck to work there". You are in big trouble when the cooks get the mindset of "I can make better money down the street and it can't possibly suck as bad as working here".