What this equates to are demands that may at times seem a little outrageous. And, with this increase in demands, it can often really affect an employee’s morale as they are “ridden” harder for increased customer satisfaction. Managers have to be really careful in these situations to protect the interests of clientele and employees. You can accomplish both by first focusing on the needs of the employee. His or her improved outlook on work will increase the likelihood of continued focus on customer satisfaction, which in turn, keeps the customers coming back.

Here are a couple of suggestions on how this is achieved:

• Give praise: One of the best things you can do for an employee is to recognize his or her contributions to the team.
• Build a system of recognition: Don’t rely only on management’s ability to recognize and reward. Build a system whereby your patrons have the opportunity to recognize an employee for a job well-done. This is often accomplished with feedback cards.
• Provide reward: Whether it’s an extra shift off, a free meal on the house, or an employee-of-the-month picture on the wall, the reward for a job well done is appreciated and remembered.
• Offer “vent” sessions: When dealing with difficult customers, a lot of individuals find that the greatest release of the associated pressure is to ‘vent’ to others about what happened. Give your employees a place where they can do this in a facilitated environment. They can then let out that frustration and also identify with others on the team who have experienced similar situations—building team unity.

But what I think that many restaurants are forgetting is that everyone is looking for value. In our household, I can admit to now buying only items that are on sale or with a coupon. In the past, I would scoff at the idea and could not think of wasting my time. But now that times are a bit leaner and we are all making every dollar stretch a bit more, all sectors of the industry need to get back to basics.

Simply gimmickery such as BOGOs or slash and burn sales may only bring the one time diner into the restaurant. but it will not retain them as long term customers.

I am witness to it.

After cutting out coupons from the Sunday paper, I thought that taking the kids out to lunch at Quizno’s was a good choice since there were 8 coupons to pick from. I could certainly take my two children and myself out and eat relatively cheap before we went out to run errands. We each had a sandwich with chips and a drink and after the coupon, I paid under $14. Not bad for a quick, cheap meal.

But I probably will not go back to Quizno’s anytime soon. It was not because of the meal. Overall, I got what I expected. It was the service. No one behind the counter engaged us. The help looked like they did not want to be there and with only one other person ahead of us, it took almost 5 minutes before our order was taken – very slow by many QSR standards, especially with a solo diner ahead of us.

If restauranteurs can do the ordinary things extra-ordinarily well, I think many will get out of 2009 with only a few bumps and bruises. But get away from delivering great service and operations, the core of the business will wither away

Overall, customers are looking for great value and cutting back on all spending. A lot of this was witnessed with the huge sales towards the end of the year to attract customers. But what will bring the customers coming back is having solid service and a relevant concept with a value. The buy a dinner get a free dessert will not work, but rather buy one dinner, get one free.

It is a different set of rules. The companies that can understand the pains of their customers the most and make their concept adhere to the constraints of the average household will win in the end.

Unfortunately, I am not sure if I can say the same of the current state of some restaurant chains these days. Just the other day in the Sunday paper, I came across a coupon for Macaroni Grill’s frozen dinner. With slumping sales at the restaurants, I was dumbfounded to see that maybe Macaroni Grill was trying to capture consumers at home. Maybe the thought is that since many consumers are staying away from dining out, maybe they should try to get them at home instead.

Just last month, Brinker sold off a majority stake of Macaroni Grill to Golden Gate Capital.  But what I think Golden Gate Capital and others have a chance here is to make some bold changes to very tired brands. Ruby Tuesday’s is a prime example to shedding away an image that made them famous, but was no longer relevant in 2008. I love the recent television ad where the waiter says to the tiffany lamp, “The 70’s called and they want their lamp back.” Or better where the one waiter yanks off the referee jersey from off the other waiter’s back!

Desperate times means desperate measures. And it will take real vision from our leaders to take many of the brands to new levels.

Let me know your thoughts.

The One Sentence Summary: On July 22, 2008, the California Court of Appeal issued a ruling on meal breaks and rest periods that may make it easier for California employers to comply with meal and rest break requirements. Because it is likely that the case will be appealed, however, employers should be cautious in relying on the opinion until all appeals are finally concluded, which may take several years.

What They Were Fighting About:
In Brinker Restaurant v. Superior Court of San Diego County, et al., plaintiffs brought a class action complaint against Brinker Restaurants (operator of 137 restaurants in California including Chili’s, Romano’s Macaroni Grill, and Maggiano’s Little Italy) for various alleged violations of California meal and rest break requirements. In vacating the Superior Court’s order granting class certification, the Court of Appeal made several significant rulings concerning employers’ responsibility for meal periods and rest breaks:

(1) Providing Meal and Rest Breaks: The Court held that while employers cannot “impede, discourage or dissuade employees from taking” meal periods or rest breaks, employers need only provide employees the opportunity to take meal periods and rest breaks, not ensure that employees actually take them.

(2) Scheduling Meal Breaks: The Court overturned the trial court’s conclusion that the employer was required to provide meal breaks on a “rolling” five hour schedule-that is, providing a thirty minute break for each five hours worked. Because Brinker allowed its food servers to take meal breaks in the first hour of an eight hour shift (so they could work and earn tips during the busiest part of the shift), plaintiffs had argued that Brinker was required to provide a second meal period within five hours of the first meal break. The Court held that employers need provide only one meal break for employees who work between five and ten hours during a shift, regardless of when the meal period is taken. A second meal break is only required if an employee works more than ten hours.

(3) Scheduling Rest Breaks: The Court also rejected the argument that employees need to take their rest breaks in the middle of each four hour period. The Court found that Brinker did not violate the rest break requirement by allowing employees to take their meal period in the first hour of an eight hour shift and then to take their two rest breaks later in the shift.

What Brinker May Mean to You:

If this case is not overturned on appeal (which we may not know for months or even years), then employers will have more flexibility in scheduling meal periods and will not have the burden of ensuring (and proving) that employees actually take the full meal periods provided. In addition, employers will not have to pay the one hour of premium pay to employees who take an “early lunch,” a break at the wrong time, or a break of less than 30 minutes, as long as the employer provided a meal period and the employee did not work more than ten hours total.

In light of the likelihood that this case will be appealed, many recommend that employers do not make changes to meal and rest break policies without consulting legal counsel.
read more | digg story

The baristas behind the counter know most of the regular customers by their first name. They all seem very friendly although there are a lot of grumpy faces walking in for their cup of joe. The cases are full of pastries and the espresso machine is cranking away. But what gives about having to pay for the internet?

I don’t mind paying a premium for a good cup of coffee and I have bought into the whole culture. But it seems absolutely insane that the company charges for WiFi when some customers probably already spend a mortgage payment in coffee on a monthly basis.

Just earlier this year, the company announced that in a partnership with AT&T that they were going to start to offer 2 hours of free WiFi to customers who have a Starbucks card. In a couple of blogs and even on the new Starbucks customer forum, many have thought it to be a good step to help the ailing coffee giant. But I think that the company can take it a step further. Or maybe this all points back to the company taking a new approach with Howard Schultz back at the helm.

Just the other day reminded me of this example as my wife and I both work out of the house. As most home base professionals, we need a change of scenery. So we decided to work at Panera Bread for the morning. It gives us a change and we seem to be more productive when we get out every once in a while. When we left the house, our thoughts never crossed about going to Starbucks simply because why pay for the internet connection when I can get it free somewhere else? We ended up getting some breakfast and taking home lunch.

As it turns out, we have started to make it our “date” work day and we are planning to go every Monday AM to get work done. In the long run, Panera will end up with all of our coffee business.  All for giving away something free.

P.S. I posted this when I got home using my own internet!

First it was Blimpie not the Latin Chicken chain is making waves with Wal-Mart. It will be interesting to see how many of these Pollo Campero’s open up across the Deep South and Southwestern states. This seems like a can’t miss play for the chicken company. A good portion of Wal-Mart’s customer base is probably the same as Pollo’s so the synergy is good. The hispanic market is probably one of the most loyal customer bases around. Win-win in my book.

read more | digg story