[chefhow]

I was having a conversation with a vendor of mine the other day and the use of the term/title Chef came up. I had mentioned that I felt in the US we give any and every person who graduates from culinary school the term without putting in the time. I also said that I felt I was just an over glorified cook since that is what I really love to do and that a true chef, someone who REALLY KNOW'S THEIR STUFF, in my eyes, is someone who could pass the Master Chef exam thru the ACF, which I know I couldnt at this time. I have worked for/with a few of the Chef's who have both passed and failed and its not something that I really aspire to do at this point in my career.

What are everyones thoughts on this? What do you consider to be a Chef?

I think that all of us know what and where the term Chef comes from, what I want to know is if you think it should be a title that is given to those who have TRULY earned it or just a description of what we do?

[Just Jim]

If you have the ability and the responsibility, you should be able to call yourself whatever you want, whether it be Chef or Grand Wizard Of All Things Culinary.
I always say I'm a cook by trade, a chef by responsiblity.
You can call me %$#@! as long as you do it respectfully.
Likewise, calling me chef while spitting venom does nothing for me.
I do see the difference between a chef and a certified chef, and I see how we've blurred the lines.
A high percentage of culinary graduates call themselves chefs.
I've even had an applicant with no culinary experience say they "chef at home", so the term is definitely losing some of it's original meaning.
Bottom line: the chef is the chief.
If you're the chief of your kitchen, you are the chef.

Just my 2 cents.
Spend it as you wish.

[Rivver]

If you have the ability to run a restaurant, create menus, price, teach staff, run succesful events and most importantly have a loyal customer base then I feel you can call yourself a chef.

If you have someone else create menus, price and rely on 50% or more premade food but still run the operation, then I would say that person would be a kitchen manager. Im surrounded by those type of places,sadly.

I know a guy that calls himself a "chef" He worked at a seafood place and he would always brag about how busy and good his food is. I stopped by to see him and check out his operation..... First thing I saw was him cutting open a bag of white funk and dumping it into a big pot. I asked what the **** that was, he replied "New England Clam Chowder" Yuck! Then I looked around and saw cans of premades every where, from marinara, peanut sauce, to even tomato basil soup! WTF I said to myself. Im sorry but if a "chef" cant make a tomato basil soup within 30 minutes from scratch then our industry has major issues. Frozen fish, shrimp already in marnades, stuffed fish, crab cakes everything was made in a factory and bought in. And what blows me away is he did almost 250 covers that night!

[foodpump]

This has been debated in countless forums. Here's my ake:

A Chef is the Boss, the manager of the kitchen. Period.

Forget about Chefs and cooks for a minute, lets talk about hockey. Wayne Gretzky was a good NHL player. Now he's a coach. His job is to hire, fire, train, supervise, encourage, discipline, guide, and mentor his team. He could not do this, nor win the respect of his team, had he not been an NHL player.

The Chef is the one who hires, fires, trains, coaches, disciplines, encourages, frequently cooks, does the paperwork, guides and mentors his team, er... brigade. S/he can not do this if they have not been a cook-- a good cook, can't instruct if they haven't done it a million times themselves, can't earn respect of their brigade if they can't instruct or supervise.

If you can mnore or less accept what I have written, then culinary schools do NOT produce Chefs, they produce culinary school graduates.

In Europe, things are different., It is no shame to call yourself a cook. Indeed, after a 3 year apprenticeship, you are proud to call yourself an apprenticed cook--not a "Chef", but a Cook. And if your head swells too much, you look at your certificate, it states "Cook", not "Chef"

The word Chef has been so abused by the media and culinary schools, that it is an embarassment. It's also a verb now too, "Cheffing". "I Chef at the Dine-o-might", "Do you wear your Chef's whites when you're Cheffing?"

O.K. off my soap box, time to go back to work.....

[chrisandcindy]

I have spent many years running kitchens and cooking and I agree the term "chef" is used loosely today. In my book a chef is in charge of the kitchen or a part of the kitchen and has the final say in how foods are prepared and purchased. They also have to have the business sense to operate the kitchen within a budget. Being able to cook is only part of the job a true chef does.

[Phaedrus]

I consider "chef" to mean "head of the kitchen." But we do throw the term around too liberally. If you run the kitchen at a Denny's and just open bags and boxes, should you be called the Chef? I dunno...technically you're still head of the kitchen. Ideally you should have some culinary credentials and be an expert in all relevant skills to deserve the title.

[RAS1187]

We were doing a new menu tasting for the RVP, GM, VP of F&B, and other various big heads within the company.

The big heads brought in their key chef, a pretty well-known guy in the downtown area from one of our related hotels. He helped oversee the tasting to make sure everything went ok. He definitely knew his stuff about food. All his dishes were spot on.

BUTTT... the problem was that he was a mess. He made hummus on one prep table, splattered roasted pepper and chickpea puree all over the station, then moved to another one tocut vegetables. He left all the vegetable scraps scattered along the cutting board and prep area before moving to another areq to make tempura batter. Batter and flour all over my station that again he walked away from without even making an attempt to clean.

Now yes hes well known and everyone is all *bows down* to him when he walks around, but I don't know if I can consider anyone that works that messy to be a chef. I consider myself to be pretty sloppy also, so when someone's sloppiness outdoes me, especially a supposed chef of this calibur, I really feel disappointed.

Sorry if this wasnt particularly related to the thread, but just needed to rant a little bit. History/Definition of the word = Chief of the kitchen from what I understand. Unless you actulaly have a kitchen that you are chief of, you are not a chef.

[bughut]

I've graduated college with"chefs" i wouln't allow to feed my dog (even they were amazed they got through)

I've worked with un-qualified genius's (genii?)

I went on an ego trip when i qualified for a while, just cos i had done it. Ithought it was my right to be called chef.

I considered myself a chef even before my late-in -life qualifying. (big head)


Its a touchy subject. We see Celebrity "chefs" on tv. Most arnt qualified, and rely on Charismato blag their hyped up salaries.

Then there's joe bloggs down the road who's run a brigade for 25 years. (We all know a place like it) Not a qualification between them. and thats where you want to eat. He may not get "yes chef" yelled at him every 2 minutes. but he jolly well has it in the hat. He and everyone else knows whos chef.

I could go on and on (and often do iknow) but surely its a respect thing. Your own and that of you peers, subordinates and the public that class a good chef

[rolls4eggrolls]

The term "chef" should be valued. I don't care if you paid 60k to learn how to make pate's and know the difference between olive and peanut oil. It takes EXPERIENCE. Students coming out of culinary schools these days have their head up their @$$ thinking they can work for anyone and get paid $$$. Too much ego...not enough talent or heart.

[foodpump]

Originally Posted by rolls4eggrolls

The term "chef" should be valued. I don't care if you paid 60k to learn how to make pate's and know the difference between olive and peanut oil. It takes EXPERIENCE. Students coming out of culinary schools these days have their head up their @$$ thinking they can work for anyone and get paid $$$. Too much ego...not enough talent or heart.

That's because the word "Chef" is a "replacement" for cook. Everyone wants to be a chief, not an Indian.

[left4bread]

THESE ARE MY OPINIONS. DON'T TAKE THEM TO HEART. I'VE BEEN DRINKING.

I agree that the word is thrown around too casually,
and I feel that the term should take into consideration the caliber of food being prepared.
Most of my duties would be the duties that a chef would perform, but the food being served is, honestly, glorified pub fare.
We're really busy and keep getting busier so the menu keeps getting dumbed down. People like it, but it's not a menu that I would walk into a job interview with. I would, however walk into a job interview and explain how I leveled out FC and helped make the place more fluid and productive.

For this forum, I chose "restaurant manager" and I think the title fits better than "chef".

So, to me, a chef would be someone who:
sacrifices their social life and marries their job,
works ungodly hours,
can plan tomorrow's unexpected 5 course dinner for 30 people in their head while cleaning out the **** grease trap,
is always pushing the envelope with specials and menus,
drinks too much,
is aware of and implements culinary trends (except for that foam fad, yuck) into their menus,
7-10 years holding "chef" position,
Also, you should have spent at least a years working in a dish pit.
And I like the idea of a chef being a working chef. Otherwise you're just administration (like me ). I do the ordering and food costing and a myriad of other things that take up my whole day, but I rarely... RARELY pick up a knife. All my knives are at home collecting dust.

It really bugs me when friends call me a chef. "Learned cook" or "somewhat knowledgeable cook" would be more accurate.

Hey, I'm no chef. Just a restaurant manager who has been in the biz for 20+ years.
Worked Foh and BoH. I don't expect to be agreed with. I've still got a lot to learn. But to me, this is what a chef is.
Hope I don't sound like an idiot.

[Schuster]

Even when I was the exec at my previous job, I never considered myself a chef. To me, a chef is the guy who always has the answer to everything and knows how to make anything and make it well. I still feel slightly uneasy when servers at my current job refer to me as a chef (I'm not the exec there). I'd guess that I will never willingly call myself a chef, no matter how much I learn, because there is always something I don't know, and by my own criteria, I'll still just be a cook.

That said, I have met exactly two people in my life who I would willingly call "chef". The exec before me at my previous job, and the exec at my current job. I will not even refer to the sous at my current job as "chef". Respect for tradition is one thing, earning respect through a very high degree of ability is another. The sous is very good, but I still know quite a few things that he hasn't grasped yet. If I know something that you don't, you don't deserve to be called "chef" in my eyes.

[Nick.Shu]

Tis an interesting question. With regards to capabilities, it would be down to how one faced challenges. Ive seen people fold and people thrive under pressure situations.

I havent been an Exec nor a Exec Sous. Thats not to say that I couldnt be, just that i couldnt be bothered to this stage. My main focus is going in and helping people out, regardless of cooking styles or function.

The way I look at it, the more I gain experience, the better I can be. After passing through 150 kitchens in 5 years, I think that I can pass as a Chef.

After all, if people who own establishments feel fit to fly me around Australia to cook at in their kitchens, then there must be some value attached to my services.

[Peachcreek]

My focus has always been to know my craft and trade: To that end I've attained the title of "Kitchen Putz". I'll even answer to "Culinary Goof"...Or, "Hey! You in the Kitchen!!" Or best yet, just call me Tom.

[Just Jim]

Originally Posted by Schuster

If I know something that you don't, you don't deserve to be called "chef" in my eyes.

That's a hard line to hold.
Considering that there is always something to learn, and that there is always someone who knows something that someone else doesn't (especially when you factor in regional cuisines), no one would ever be called Chef, by your standards.