Need some opinions...

[ChefTorrie]

I havn't posted here for a while, but I need some help.
I am the Head Chef at a decently high volume restaurant.(we have 8 people on the line at once)
But anyways, I need some advice from fellow Head/Exec chefs, Sous Chefs, or whoever can lend a word.

My head sous left 2 weeks ago, and the new sous that I hired started on monday. Now granted its only thursday, but I have some major bones to pick with this guy. When I interviewed him, he showed me all his credentials, and his work experience, so on and so forth.
The man is 39 years old, and has also worked in many different restaurants around the Boston area.
Cutting to the chase, I gave him the Job.
I came in at about 740 on monday morning, and he was already at the Restaurant waiting for me to open it up, so I thought it was a good sign.
PLAIN AND SIMPLY its been 4 days and the guy SUCKS. And believe me, I dont like saying that about people that are slow learners in the kitchen, but from the credentials he was throwing in my face and the experience that he had in other restaurants, I dont know how much longer I can wait for this guy.
He cant do a thing for himself. I told him to clean chicken while I set part of the line up, (this was on his first day so I just wanted to get his feet wet) but to him, cleaning chicken was putting in a rondo and running water over it. When I came back he was roasting garlic, I asked him why the chicken was in the sink, and he said he cleaned it!!!!
I then had to explain to him he need to separate the 2 breasts, and cut the fat off, evidently he didnt know what I was talking about, so AGAIN I gave him the benefit of the doubt.
He just plain sucks, I'm sorry.
The past 3 days I've had to have him on salad station. I am paying this guy alot of money (as head sous) and he is doing work that I can have my 17 year old prep boy do, who I pay 9 an hour.
I dont know what I should do.
For christ sake the guy cant even expedite the tickets when they come in.
I cant/shouldnt fire him after less than a week can I?
I really dont know wat to do. I was hoping this guy would be good and I can train him well, and he could eventually open the restaurant because I cant be working open to close 6 days a week, especially with the kids going back to school.
Any advice?

[shroomgirl]

I ran across this same thing a few months ago, hired a 50ish woman who had years of experience, ran her own kitchen, worked for years at a hotel as exec....had worked for one of the best pastry chef's I've known.

long story short, she was slow....very very slow, she burned multiple batches of pate sucre with euro butter, she took 40 minutes to fiddle with a cheese platter until I'd finally had enough and slammed it out in 15 minutes.
My 19 year old niece was in the kitchen....with no experience she asked questions. The older hire was not asking questions but fumbling around....

So, were my expectations so high and my explainations not sufficient? I don't know....probably a combo. But man I really resented cutting that higher check with lower return/loss of product. My normal OP is to hire experience and pay for it.....next time I'll have a learning curve....start at this rate and work up, if you work well you move up quickly.

Catering is not restaurant work....but thought I'd offer up that learning curve.

[ChefTorrie]

Originally Posted by shroomgirl

I ran across this same thing a few months ago, hired a 50ish woman who had years of experience, ran her own kitchen, worked for years at a hotel as exec....had worked for one of the best pastry chef's I've known.

long story short, she was slow....very very slow, she burned multiple batches of pate sucre with euro butter, she took 40 minutes to fiddle with a cheese platter until I'd finally had enough and slammed it out in 15 minutes.
My 19 year old niece was in the kitchen....with no experience she asked questions. The older hire was not asking questions but fumbling around....

So, were my expectations so high and my explainations not sufficient? I don't know....probably a combo. But man I really resented cutting that higher check with lower return/loss of product. My normal OP is to hire experience and pay for it.....next time I'll have a learning curve....start at this rate and work up, if you work well you move up quickly.

Catering is not restaurant work....but thought I'd offer up that learning curve.

I dont really have time to give this guy a learning curve. I need he to be had of the line. Its hard to cut the guy slack when your doing 200 counts from 12-2, and thats only for lunch. Which is the only time hes worked so far, i would like to see him 4-1030 when dinner rush comes.
Bottom line, I hired him because he said he had experience at running a line.
IM SOOOOOO frustrated and really not wanting to go to open the restaurant in the AM.

[thetincook]

Chef, its time to terminate the dude. You shouldn't need to train up this guy to be a sous if he's lacking basic skills. It's costing you a lot more then his salary to keep him on staff. Think of all the time you'll have to spend cleaning up his messes and covering for him. Think of how crew morale will be with his ineffectual leadership.

Take it as a lesson to check references and have canidates do a stage. Most places I've worked at brought sous up from within or the new sous was someone that the chef had worked with before.

Would it be possible to move #3 up to #2?

[nowIamone]

You don't say if you checked his references, and called previous employers.
So I'm assuming you didn't. But I will share that I once had a hire, who wasn't who he said he was, found out when I called references and they told me he was still employed, in fact he answered the phone. Taught me to ask for a look at the driver's license.

Over the years I've come of the opinion that "I tell them it's not working out for me and today was their last shift." I say no more than " that it's not working out for me" and I have yet to have anyone ask "why not?" Either they already know or they don't care what the problem was. It is always a feeling of relief to have it over with. If you don't think it will get better, bite the bullet.

Suggest that check his references if you haven't. It might re-enforce what you are thinking. Do what you have to do. Also, suggest from this time forward that you hire with a 30 day probation period.

[oldschool1982]

ChefTorrie,

Not knowing what the Labor Laws are in your state..... I would still have to say you have two choices. Either give the guy a fighting chance to reach around, grab a handfull of hair and pull his head out of his assssss or..... Explain that things just aren't working out and take your losses immediately.

If you honestly can say the ability is not there now is the time. The longer you wait the more difficult it will become to cut the guy loose when you really need to. Most HR folks cringe at this approach since they want you to nurse, nurture and just about carry the person while letting them suckel at the ....... Well bullpucky! I hate that approach. Months can be spent writting the person up, laying out 30, 60, and 90 perfomance objectives and stillyou are no better than you were when you started things. In fact you're more frustrated and beat to he!! since you've had to do all the extra crap.

I know this sounds harsh but having been in this position before and following the misguided advice of the well meaning HR person..... Let's just call tha advice hindsight. It always seems to be 20/20.

[thetincook]

No need for a probation period if you are in an at-will state. Sometimes if you include probation period type phrases in the employee handbook or offer letter you can damage the at-will relationship. This can come back to hurt you if you term an employee and they decide to litigate.

[ChefRAZ]

Did you call his references? ditch him if he's no good you can't train someone with credentials they are trained already..your just got a smooth talker. someone that thinks once he got his foot in the door he could learn what to do.

[kuan]

You can't afford to stress out over this. It is not your job to be a culinary instructor. Give him his walking papers. Tell him it's not working out, you cannot forsee it working out, and wish him better luck elsewhere. (Denny's for instance)

[foodnfoto]

Most labor laws in the US accept that 30 days from time of hire is a probationary period whether stated in the original employment contract or not. Therefore, you are within your rights and well protected if you let him go within a 30 day period.

That said, I think you should be a straight shooter with him regarding his obvious lack of skills and general knowlege. Just be direct and say something like "Your work since you been here does not measure up to the standards and expectations I have for a Sous Chef. You need to be able to clean and prep chicken, etc, etc, without being told how. These are some of the basic skills I take for granted that a qualified sous at your pay scale should know. Clearly, this is not the case in this situation." You could then either give him the choice of accepting a less skilled-lower pay position (if available) or leaving.

Do not discount the affect his bungling has on your other crew!

On another, obliquely related note--I've noticed that several posters here have used the phrase "reach around" as a euphamism for acceptable, capable and courteous behavior. This is interpreted in some quarters as an extremely offensive reference to certain types of sexual behavior and in MHO should not be used in this forum. Of course, that is up to the moderators.

One might also look at the origins of the phrase "rule of thumb" and while I'm not trying to be some kind of PC language police, it would be fine if this was dropped from our accepted vernacular.

[jigz369]

Hey Chef, fire the bum!
I have always done working interviews for any hires to a senior position. Bring your next possible hire in for a shift and see if his "credentials" match his abilities. This has saved me on several occasions by not hiring a bum and having a certified professional on the job.
Just my opinion though.....

[thetincook]

Originally Posted by foodnfoto

Most labor laws in the US accept that 30 days from time of hire is a probationary period whether stated in the original employment contract or not. Therefore, you are within your rights and well protected if you let him go within a 30 day period.

Dude, you do not want to refer to it as a employment contract unless you have an actual written contract with the employee because if you do, you will destroy the at-will relationship.

This means that you have less of an ability to fire the employee for whatever reason. This also gives a terminated employee added leverage in litigation if you did not term for "just cause."

Furthermore, several courts have found in situations where the employer had a probationary period in the handbook, even in an at-will state and even without a written contract, that there was an implied in law contract with the employee. This is usually based on the handbook implying that after the probationary period, the employee would only be fired for good cause.

This destroys the at-will presumption, which no employer should want to do.

[panini]

Chef,
I'm a little surprised by the hesitation. This is not a personal decision, it's a business move. Above all, you must protect the operation and your staff.
Pan

[Psycho Chef]

I've never hired anyone until they've worked a shift or up to a week for more senior positions. At the beginning it is clearly stated that they are "trailing" and when finished we'd talk about salary etc.. It's like an audition. You tend to see the best of what people have when they are working to earn the position. And you get to decide if what they're asking for is fair.
After two days with this guy I would have told him to hit the road and only paid him what every other "trailer" gets: $50 a day. So I'd be out $100 bucks but would have learned a very important lesson: call people's former jobs and never just take someones word when it comes to cooking and running a kitchen. The proof is in the pudding.

Resumes mean nothing

[oldschool1982]

Dear foodnfoto,

WOW! For 25yrs I have used that and this is a first. I certainly hope that whenever you see the words "reach" and "around" used together in a sentence that images of a "sexual" nature do not continually pop up in your mind. I understand that by even responding to you it gives the whole situation some sort of validity but that is my nature. I understand you have been here a long time and mean no disrespect with the reply. I just wish people would quit reading between the lines or putting actions in others mouths. Ya know you could always PM me if you have a problem/question with my reference to something in a post. Again part of my nature to respond to such things.

Yet, For the record......
There is, was nor ever will be an implication of a sexual nature in my use of that particular statement. In most of the Chefs' and restaurant circles I have been around it refers to having "one's head up their asssssss" and "provides a way to extract such". Unless told by the moderators or Nicko himself I will continue to use it as a metaphor for the actions that the described Sous Chef has displayed.

I offer no apology but hope this explaination will help clear the air and your mind as to it's intended reference.

Jeezus what is this Bevis and Butthead???