Hello all so i have a random question that popped into my mind reading some of the prior threads on this site.Would you guys prefer a line cook and or a sous chef to come in to your establishment do a kick butt job for lets say 6-9 months and leave or would you rather have a line cook and or sous chef come to your place and do a so-so job but give you between a year or two of service time?
longevity over quality?
Good thoughts from both of you.i can see getting the guy in and trying to make him comfortable enough to stay for sure..i never really thought about how much "demand" for the position as a way to determine which of the two would be a better fit.but i could definetly see how that would play a part..my guess is only the most veteran of veteran chefs would think of that idea..im still a little wet behind the ears as that wouldnt have crossed my mind :)
Nothing is ever simple. It is your job to provide an environment that enables getting the most out of everyone you hire, encouraging everyone to keep learning and improving. Some people respond better than others. Before you fire some one, you need to have someone ready to step in. On the other hand, no matter how many applicants you have, if you have a good employee, you don't need to worry about hiring anyone else. So it makes sense to work out how to retain and improve the staff you have already as much as possible.
On a related note, if you have high employee turnover, the employees are not the problem. Low employee turnover is a sign of healthy, though not perfect, management.