# Thoughts on building a kitchen staff in today's professional culinary atmosphere.



## alisha nicole (Apr 7, 2010)

https://munchies.vice.com/articles/its-impossible-to-find-good-cooks-nowadays

I thought this article, though brief, really hit a lot of nails on the head regarding the struggle of building an effective team in today's restaurant kitchens. In my youth as a novice cook, I definitely suffered from an undeserved sense of culinary capability that I simply did not possess, but it was well beaten out of me by a string of kitchen jobs requiring varying levels of skill and responsibility.

Since then, and most notably very recently, I've worked with cooks who are around the age I was when I started getting serious about my field, and they're astoundingly unresponsive to criticism and indignant in terms of absorbing the demands of the kitchen that are vital to keeping a restaurant churning the way it must-- long hours, missing holidays & family events, timeliness, a sense of urgency, and the like.

What do you other professional chefs and cooks think? Does this article strike at the heart at some of your struggles in building the ideal kitchen team? There are certainly exceptions to the rule, and some very promising young cooks whose hearts are truly in this cruel and unforgiving industry will always be present, but it feels like a growing problem with daunting implications for the future of dining out.

What do you think?


----------



## kingfarvito (May 7, 2012)

I think restaurants have to take a decent portion of the blame. They don't want to have to teach anyone anymore. Pantry station or prep should (in my experience) be an entry level position at most decent places. But now a days help wanted ads even say they want dishwashers with experience. The big issue with this is that you lose a lot of people are intelligent, hard workers. Why? Are you really so busy that you can't teach someone to put together a salad, or teach someone to prep out the hot line? And pay is a whole different issue that exists that we'll get into a different time.


----------



## chefwriter (Oct 31, 2012)

This is a big question. Or a big problem with many causes.

      There are many factors involved; media misrepresentation of the profession, proliferation of culinary schools, tremendous availability of preprocessed and prepared foods as well as those mentioned in the article and by the other posters. The low pay is a serious one as is the long hours and lack of work/life balance. I wish I had answers for some of these but if there are daunting implications for the future of dining out, I think it's time we faced those implications.


----------



## grande (May 14, 2014)

Build a good environment where people treat each other with respect. Pay what you can. Don't be too stingy with food. Have fun. Don't break the law. Don't work people clopens or split shifts unless they want it. Pay overtime. Make people responsibilities clear. Tell them that they need to do things the way you want them whatever their opinion. Don't overwork them; some people only want to work part time. Teachable moments means explaining why you want a certain thing, even if there is another viewpoint. Mentoring people means teaching them to feel some of the love you have for the job. To some people its just a shit job. Keep looking for people & try to give the good ones a reason to stay.


----------



## cheflayne (Aug 21, 2004)

The article,... oh yeah..., a lot of nails hit on the head. Today's electronic world has lent itself to creating a lot of instant experts, but  without the real knowledge and experience to back it up. You only get real knowledge and experience one way, putting in the time, which includes a healthy dose of learning the business and leadership, such as teaching and instructing staff, along the way,

Everybody today wants to hire people with experience, but the people with experience have, in large, been taught by other people without lots of experience themselves, so it is self propagating.

Low pay and long hours are nothing new to the industry. In the past they didn't really deter people from being in the industry. Mentorship is disappearing and being lost in a sea of instant experts.


----------



## phaedrus (Dec 23, 2004)

I read an article recently about a 16-17 year old child "chef" that has people lined up out the door. Seems he staged or worked for a while at a high end restaurant and is now bringing the techniques back home. All I could do is shake my head at it. Sure, he's probably doing some cool stuff but aside from MG parlor tricks how much could he really_ know_ about the* fundamentals *of cooking at that age? To be charitable he may be a savant but there's simply no way he could have a deep and broad culinary knowledge with his youth and inexperience.

The internet and cooking shows have created a large field of folks that know how to spherify caviar and stuff but you can't fake experience. I can look up something online and integrate it into what I'm trying to do based on 25+ years of restaurant experience. I knew a lot a few years in but I'm still learning to this day. I don't really know any shortcuts to putting in your time.

I think one major crisis hitting restaurants is that the elevating cooks and chefs to artist status has been a double edged sword. Now that we celebrate chefs as celebrities people getting into the field expect to be paid like celebrities, and they want it to happen overnight. And given the trend towards buying packaged stuff lots of the wannabees can fake their way through the job for quite a while if they have a few tricks to impress the yokels.


----------



## lagom (Sep 5, 2012)

I have to agree that building a staff has become more challenging in recent years. While, to me at least, it has been about building a network of people, not just working currently with you, but keeping past mates in the circle also. Finding these gems have become more difficult and Im finding there are fewer young chefs in that network. 

For example, 2 weeks ago I helped a friend do an event for 1200. I have helped him before as it is an every other year event. There were 5 of us doing the prep, cooking, plating ect,ect. Not one person in the kitchen under 32, with me at the top end at 50. Where are the youngins? 

10 years from now I can assure you I wont have too many 16 hour days in me and honestly, even though I network a lot, I not sure I have enough young cooks in my pipeline to pick up the excess. 

Guess Ill never get to retire.


----------



## phaedrus (Dec 23, 2004)

As others have mentioned, I too have lamented the lack of in-house development and mentoring I see today. I'm sure that in the truly great restaurants it's still going on but cheflayne says a lot of the experience young guys are getting is watching and working with guys that never learned the fundamentals themselves. While I was lucky to work under one really good chef for the most part I have been responsible for developing myself! You really do need to push yourself and keep growing. I really like cheflayne's sig line: _Wisdom comes with age, but sometimes age comes alone. _ So many guys with "20 years of experience" really just learned what they know in the first couple years and then stopped. It's part of a broader work ethic and sense of curiosity to keep pushing your horizons and learning new things. You kind of have to because often no one is interested in teaching you stuff, especially stuff that isn't immediately necessary for you to do your job.


----------



## panini (Jul 28, 2001)

I feel that working towards a career is gone. People just starting out consider what they are doing is their career, when it's basically working in a profession.


----------



## phaedrus (Dec 23, 2004)

Sadly, at 46 I still haven't found anything I'd rather do! Some days I hate cooking but the truth is that I love it./img/vbsmilies/smilies/redface.gif


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

The comments so far have made me think back to my days in the heat of the kitchens I worked.

I do not remember EVER having the Chef come up to me to teach me how to do something.

I DO remember following the other cooks who taught me what they said the Chef wanted.

This, to me was always wrong.

In order to get everyone on the same page it is the Chef who must teach and or show each kitchen department what they want.

Allowing a cook or other to teach a incoming employee, sometimes, also teaches bad habits or "tricks" that usually end up making the Chef angry.

And...sadly this also happens in the FOH where servers simply follow along with another server for 2 weeks and then are allowed to go it alone.


----------



## panini (Jul 28, 2001)

@Chefross , That's a fact. Especially when you're hiring. If you find someone that has not been trained by a qualified chef, You spend more time trying to rid them of

all their wrong shortcuts. Even worse is when you're gone they usually flip back to the wrong way.


----------



## maravedi (Jul 3, 2015)

Thought I'd resurrect this thread as I'm in the middle of a hiring fair for a new facility.

I've noticed the team I'm putting together is more guys in their 30s and 40s. I'm concerned about the habits they'll bring, but frankly I'm happy to have cooks who understand what the day to day grind is really like. 

The younger dudes I've interviewed balk at having a closing shift that keeps then there past midnight, or demand Saturdays or Sundays off, or even turn their nose up at the menu for not being "interesting" enough. I haven't found a DW yet because even kids looking for their first job get indignant and put out when that's all I'm offering them.

I feel like the mindset of "do the best you can at the job you've been given" is a dwindling commodity. I have 2 guys in their mid-20s now who have this mindset, and I've taken them with me to every kitchen I've worked in the last 6 years... Because they're the only ones I've met


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Here's a good article about the subject.

http://harvestamericacues.com/2015/10/10/how-can-restaurants-hang-on-to-exceptional-cooks/


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

Someday said:


> Here's a good article about the subject.
> 
> http://harvestamericacues.com/2015/10/10/how-can-restaurants-hang-on-to-exceptional-cooks/


Read the article.

Couldn't disagree more.

In the fairy tale world of "yes Chef" where all the employees have happy smiles and do their work diligently and in a fast manner, and never complain, yadda yadda......

The fact is those people are very few and very far between.

Respect the opinions of my cooks?

In what world?

Firstly the cooks have to know what they are talking about before I can respect an opinion

Cooks like to know what's going on.

It's none of their business. Their business is to come to work on time, and do their job to the best of their abilities. What goes on with the business end is managements concern.

Empower the cooks? Seriously?

The article was and is not a real world perception of the business. I'm inclined to believe all these items, but experience has shown me all of the examples will not work unless the individuals are professionals. Young adults, older retirees, and their ilk will not embrace these ideas, and beliefs, simply because they are there for the money and a job.

The real issue is professionalism in a profession that doesn't have standards to hold people.

These ideals may be fine and good for corporations and or chains, but very difficult to entertain in individual places that hire the local color.


----------



## maravedi (Jul 3, 2015)

Chefross said:


> Respect the opinions of my cooks?
> 
> In what world?


Lol! I'm all for teaching my cooks, helping them grow and learn as culinarians, but...

There's a reason there's a Chef.


----------



## grande (May 14, 2014)

@chefross I don't wholly disagree with you, but I don't wholly agree either. The title of the article is "How can restaurants hang onto exceptional cooks." By the time a cook can be called exceptional, the already do things your way. The baby steps of grooming someone to move up means giving them some kind of resposibility. The flip side of this is needing to be able to trust your cooks when you aren't around, which means pushing them to do things right on their own.

I'm a firm believer, too, in keeping cooks informed about what's going on. Communication keeps everyone on the same page. I will occasionally even solicit an opinion- when I feel like it. If you have experienced cooks, you should take advantage of their knowledge. It's a little different for you, 
because you've been doing this longer than I have, but when I got my first sous job at 25 that experienced hand sometimes knew what I needed to know.

Having said all that, there is DEFINATELY a reason there's a chef.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Grande said:


> @chefross I don't wholly disagree with you, but I don't wholly agree either. The title of the article is "How can restaurants hang onto exceptional cooks." By the time a cook can be called exceptional, the already do things your way. The baby steps of grooming someone to move up means giving them some kind of resposibility. The flip side of this is needing to be able to trust your cooks when you aren't around, which means pushing them to do things right on their own.


Thank you for saying what I was going to say, but in a much nicer way.

Many/most of the chefs on here are implicit in the pseudo military hierarchy of the kitchen. That is all well in good, if that seems to work for you. This isn't the 1970's. The days of "Kitchen Confidential" are done. Abuse, harassment, etc have gone the way of the dodo.


Chefross said:


> Respect the opinions of my cooks?
> 
> In what world?
> 
> Firstly the cooks have to know what they are talking about before I can respect an opinion


Yes, you should absolutely, 100% respect the opinion of your cooks. You should respect the opinion of your DISHWASHER. Respect is earned, and respect is given. It doesn't mean that you agree with them, or will do what they want/ask, but it means that if someone on your team has an opinion or something to say, you owe it to them to at least hear them out and facilitate a dialogue. Respect doesn't mean agreement.


Chefross said:


> Cooks like to know what's going on.
> 
> It's none of their business. Their business is to come to work on time, and do their job to the best of their abilities. What goes on with the business end is managements concern.


Wow. And how invested do you think these cooks will be. If they feel like nothing more than a factory worker or a cog in a machine, they will become disillusioned and probably not last long or give 100%. If you somehow think that involving cooks in problem solving is a bad thing, I'm glad I don't work for you. 


Chefross said:


> Empower the cooks? Seriously?


Absolutely. As long as they are making decisions based on what is best for the business and can be trusted, why not? Given a subordinate some measure of autonomy and control is a time honored way to show trust and build confidence and investment in the team. Those types of people, aside from the sous chefs and chefs, are the leaders in the trenches. I love it when I know I can trust one of my cooks to do the right thing and I don't have to micromanage all the time.

How can that be a bad thing?


Chefross said:


> The article was and is not a real world perception of the business. I'm inclined to believe all these items, but experience has shown me all of the examples will not work unless the individuals are professionals. Young adults, older retirees, and their ilk will not embrace these ideas, and beliefs, simply because they are there for the money and a job.
> 
> The real issue is professionalism in a profession that doesn't have standards to hold people.
> 
> These ideals may be fine and good for corporations and or chains, but very difficult to entertain in individual places that hire the local color.


Again, the article is titled "How can restaurants hang on to exceptional cooks." What standards are you talking about? I'm assuming that most of us, as chefs, set our own standards in our own kitchens. If someone that works for me isn't meeting standards, they are let go.

The article is a list of ideas to help chefs understand ways to build better teams and hang on to good cooks. It isn't saying that all these things will always be relevant, or even applicable all the time. It may show an ideal, but I ask...what is wrong with that?

This shit-eating, macho bullshit kitchen culture is on its way out. Dawn of a new era. Times are a-changing.

The same chefs that are lamenting not being able to find cooks (I mean, have you HEARD about the cook crisis in every city in America right now?) are the same ones who yell, scream, abuse, don't train or invest time in cooks, and pay shitty wages.

Its a complicated issue, to be sure, but just saying "the problem is THIS" or "the problem is THAT" is insanely short sighted and does nothing to solve the problems. The onus for solving the problems turns to us, the chefs/managers/cooks in the industry.


----------



## cheflayne (Aug 21, 2004)

Grande said:


> ...By the time a cook can be called exceptional, the already do things your way. The baby steps of grooming someone to move up means giving them some kind of resposibility. The flip side of this is needing to be able to trust your cooks when you aren't around, which means pushing them to do things right on their own.
> 
> I'm a firm believer, too, in keeping cooks informed about what's going on. Communication keeps everyone on the same page. I will occasionally even solicit an opinion...


Ditto this big time +++!

I believe in keeping cooks informed about what is going on. The ones that are paying attention and are interested are the ones that I invest more time in. Soliciting opinions creates a team atmosphere and makes people feel appreciated. The input received from staff are another good gauge of who to invest time in.

A kitchen should not be a vacuum or black hole.


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

Someday said:


> Thank you for saying what I was going to say, but in a much nicer way.
> 
> Many/most of the chefs on here are implicit in the pseudo military hierarchy of the kitchen. That is all well in good, if that seems to work for you. This isn't the 1970's. The days of "Kitchen Confidential" are done. Abuse, harassment, etc have gone the way of the dodo.
> 
> ...


Okay....I knew I'd get flack for this one.

Everything you've all pointed out has merit, but it is predicated on the idea that the employee WANTS to be there to learn and grow. Thank you.

My thoughts are with all of you, really they are, but experiences have shown me otherwise.

I am the first one in line to agree on the screaming, yelling, physically abusive Chef. I was on the receiving end of that more than I want to remember.

There is no room for this behavior today....PERIOD!

My conclusion was to be that the article was written on the thesis that all people working in the food business want to be there and do a good job, and this just isn't real world.

Sure, as a Chef or owner/operator you would want to hold on to the good employee and do away with the not-so-good after their trial period is over, but in the real world, where the labor pool leaves a lot to be desired, it just isn't so.

Many places end up having to carry that bad apple, simply because they can't (or won't) find a replacement.

Small towns suffer worse then larger cities, in that the labor pool is much larger vs. the small town.

Now, all things being equal, how would one go about initiating the articles goals in small town America?

I've been there and tried that, so speaking from personal experiences, my conclusion was, and still is, that the goals can be achieved, ONLY if you have a knowledgeable, mature, and experienced staff, otherwise you're setting yourself up for failure before you even begin to knock your head against the wall.


----------



## maravedi (Jul 3, 2015)

Someday said:


> Its a complicated issue, to be sure, but just saying "the problem is THIS" or "the problem is THAT" is insanely short sighted and does nothing to solve the problems. The onus for solving the problems turns to us, the chefs/managers/cooks in the industry.


I grouse about finding talent, but I'm fully committed to getting the people that I _do _bring into my kitchen to a competent and professional level through their training (well, _trying really hard_ to get them there /img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif). If we have a shortage in our industry, if we don't feel the culinary schools are doing their job or apprenticeship programs have failed, then we take on the responsibility (as it was in the old days) to turn normal humans into cooks, and cooks into chefs. And yeah, doing it without the screaming and ego-driven hierarchy is important. BUT... the brigade does work well, and it works with a calm chef as well as a screaming one, so don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

On the note of retaining/building excellence in their cooks, does anyone try to implement programs and ideas like those found in Chef Carroll's "Leadership Lessons"? Is it feasible to try that sort of leadership training and incentive program in anything less than a country-club or hotel environment that have that kind of staffing levels? I'm happy to offer PTO days and hold roundtables, but I wonder if pushing for leadership and empowerment in places with less than a couple dozen BOH employees feels contrived, or leads to a "too many indians" situation?


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Another article I read today on the subject. Seems pretty straight forward (and a possible embedded ad "article") but the points are decent ones.

https://pos.toasttab.com/blog/the-5-real-reasons-youre-losing-restaurant-staff


----------



## grande (May 14, 2014)

Substandard equipment and working with underperfirmers really strike home


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

Someday said:


> Another article I read today on the subject. Seems pretty straight forward (and a possible embedded ad "article") but the points are decent ones.
> 
> https://pos.toasttab.com/blog/the-5-real-reasons-youre-losing-restaurant-staff


I just read that myself today. The one about having to work with bad apples hit me, as it pertains to this thread.


----------



## panini (Jul 28, 2001)

I'm an old timer even though my thinking is current. I can't count the people I've hired in my career. Some will disagree with this but it works for me.The one thing I permanently keep in mind when ever it comes to associates, hiring or retaining, is to make sure I instill in them a sense of ownership. If an associate doesn't feel like he or she does not own the job they are doing they tend to be just present or going through the motions. I'm not talking about monetary things although my long timers do acquire an actual % of real ownership for exceptional performance and there are monetary appreciations for others after being there for a while.

 If I need to train someone, I explain ownership of their job before details. My most common question is " if you owned this job, would you let someone do that?". If I find someone who doesn't get on board with ownership, I move on to someone else.

I have an appreciation system for an ownership performance, but it's not discussed up front.

  Once I establish ownership with an associate, which includes the cost of their products, the revenue that product produces, how quality impacts revenue, what it costs and how much revenue  it takes to make up for returns or waste, they start acting  like they own their area especially since they understand if they perform correctly there might be funds available for appreciation.

   This also results in other positions of ownership respecting each other and helping when needed. In the last 15 yrs. I've practiced this I have never witnessed an associate watch another, crash and burn.

  I have not found another other way to get everyone on board and strive for the same goal. The only con to this thinking is that you eliminate the concept of replacing associates with newer and less expensive people. I'm small but I have two people working with us who own a percentage of the company and of the ten, the newest hire has been with us for 9 yrs. up to 26 yrs.

    The reward for me is I can eliminate worries about waste, quality, theft, competition, etc.

 In the past, some of my peers have accused me of bribing my associates. I don't view it that way at all. When it may be slow, the ownership gives the associates an awareness of what's going on and they expect nothing nor do they feel entitled to something. I'm also open with revenue percentages, currently and past year comparisons.

Just my 2 cents


----------



## chefbillyb (Feb 8, 2009)

The whole thing a Chef has to realize is, when dealing with most cooks you need to basically take care of short term goals. I don't think they need to feel a part of ownership. If you try the "We are a team" You need to feel ownership" Holy shit! Most of the cooks are walking in with a Resume with working in10 restaurants, the longest being 5 months. They will probably get the job unless they killed their last Chef over the right ways to filet a fish. If I had a cook for a year or a crew that didn't change for four months was a HUGE accomplishment. I never made long term goals for people that didn't figure on being around for a long period of time. I had a few cooks that were more important to me than the "fly by night" call in brown bottle cooks. If my main cooks had a real good night, and had a good feeling about their job, I would give them a $50 or $100 bill and just thank them for caring and doing a good job. This was something they never got from another Chef or owner. Most had a look on their face like "holy shit, thanks! now I can buy my girlfriend dinner tomorrow night". Every employee reacts to a different way of gratitude. It's up to a Chef to know how to motivate a crew and keep good cooks satisfied.  I know most cooks will walk out of employee meeting saying to themselves " Whats in it for me" the whole thing is, in many cases money isn't the real motivator. I think most cooks just want to be heard and understood and not feel like it's,"do your job or hit the road". It's a real good thing for Chefs to understand that cooks need the proper equipment and tools to succeed. They also need to know the Chef has their back and doesn't throw them under the bus to save face. This is probably the only profession that a good cook can be more talented  than the Chef he/she is working for and still only makes $10 an hour. There are also a lot of chefs that may be good cooks but they aren't managers. I've never seen a good running kitchen succeed without a mutual amount of respect for each other. I think it's also important for the cook to not feel like they are in the weeds all the time. Most people can't work well under stress and you will never get a lot accomplished with a employee feels like you don't care and put them in that position. In other words they need to know you have their back and when they ask you for help there no questions asked. When your dealing with cooks your dealing with people that think " If it doesn't work out here I'll just move on down then road". This is what Chefs deal with everyday..........Chef Bill


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

I've been bleating this for years now, and it is just as true, and pertains to this thread as it has ten years ago

The culinary industry needs a benchmark or standard for what a cook should know and be capable of.

If we had this--as many other trades do, as the European cooks do, we could avoid the following problems:

-Instant chefs. No qualification, you can't use the title, doesn't matter how much youtube you watch
-Culinary schools can actually base their curriculae on a standard
-With a standard, you hang, or base a salary, as most of the other trades do, and you can actually attract fresh blood to the industry

O.k. Enough of the dreaming. Even back in the '80's employers were moaning about not finding or keeping good cooks.
So why do cooks leave?

Many reasons, but one of them is the simple fact that most cooks want exposure to as many facets of cooking as possible, and no single employer can offer this. Granted, a large hotel might be able to a broad spectrum, and cooks who work for the big hotels DO tend to stay longer. So you learn to grill steaks at one place, learn fish at another, high volume banquets at another, and so on. I did this, and highy endorse it

Another reason is that cooking IS a stepping stone, you want to become a Chef, an owner, G.M., f&'n b. No one stays behind the line forever. Many places don't offer room for advancement, so the cooks move on to find a place that does.

Or maybe there just isn't enough money to cover your basic expenses.....


----------



## panini (Jul 28, 2001)

@ChefBillyB ,

I read your post closely.


----------



## moneyknife83 (May 6, 2016)

It's not how it's why


----------



## chefbillyb (Feb 8, 2009)

panini said:


> @ChefBillyB ,
> 
> I read your post closely.


Panini, I did see your post last night. I agree with your post and agree what happens in your operation is the main goal in every operation. Thank God it did with some of the things you had to go through in your private life. When I worked in the larger cities my approach was much different. I would have crews follow me from one job to another. When I started my own business in Ag Country I was dealing with a different kind of employee. Something is wrong when you hire hundreds of people and after 15 years only have a handful of quality employee. ........Chef Bill


----------

