When I say green restaurants, I'm not referring to ones that will make you sick. What I mean is eateries that are mindful of their environmental impact when conducting the business of feeding people.
I just found this fantastic site called, "Green Table" and if you care about taking cloth bags when you shop for groceries, or avoid buying bottled water(gesh), or even compost at home....then you'll want to visit the restaurants listed on Green Table.
Who doesn't need a good excuse to eat out like taking care of the environment? And if you run a restaurant and want to know how to go green and save green bucks along with it, they can help you do that.
Check out their website at greentable[dot]net. Here's a sneak peak from their website of what it's all about:
From food courts to fine dining, family-owned independents to brand name chains, it starts with the conscious desire of a growing number of chefs and restaurateurs for clear, measurable steps to effectively reduce their operations' impact on the environment.
In completing the Green Table process, a foodservice operator can demonstrate significant, measurable results from front to back, including:
- reduced waste and more recycling
- efficient energy use and water conservation
- fewer pollutants and more eco-friendly practices
- more products and services that benefit the local economy
In a few simple steps, every Green Table member operation annually(on average)can:
- reduce water use by 120,000L
- divert more than 5 tonnes of organic waste from landfill to compost
- conserve 3,000 kWh electricity and 100gj natural gas
- reduce its greenhouse gas impacts by 10 tonnes.
Count me in!
Monday, May 25, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Self-regulation by Food Companies
I thought some of you foodies might be interested in excerpts of an article on food safety and self-regulation. It was written by Terry Pugh, published in the CCPA Monitor for April 2009...
"The listeriosis crisis that claimed the lives of at least 20 Caadians last summer and fall could have bee prevented, according to the President of the Agriculture Union, a component of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC).
Bob Kingston told the annual convention of the National Farmers' Union (NFU) that the deregulation of feed safety inspections jeopardizes the health of Canadians.
Kingston said that, prior to the listeriosis outbreak, a Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) employee was fired for letting his union see a confidential letter that was sent by the federal Treasury Board to the CFIA.
'This letter outline future Harper government plans to cut back on inspections in slaughter facilities' he said. 'They were proposing to shift fulltime meat inspection to just an oversight role.'
Kingston said the changes to the inspection system were brought in after much lobbying by the food industry to reduce government monitoring.
'When the HAACP quality management systems were introduced in meat processing plants, the large companies such as Maple Leaf argued that having these programs in place should mean less inspection, because they were now in a position to ensure compliance with health requirements on their own.
Kingston said the inspection system is 'overburdened' because inspectors have too much paperwork and too many facilities to cover to enable them to do effective inspections.
'In the old days, the inspectors would have slowed down a production line until the problem was fixed. They would have had a chat with the foreman and they would have corrected the problem before they even left the plant. But that doesn't happen any more. Instead of their conducting regular pre-operation or sanitation inspections, the plant employees now do these inspections themselves, with the CFIA inspectors reading about it when they get the time.'
Under the old system, Kingston added, processing plants were automatically required to report positive listeria finds to the inspector in charge, but under the new system that is no longer a requirement.
Some observers still believe there is nothing wrong with food companies regulating themselves, given that it is so obviously in a company's best interests not to make their customers giet sick or die. But Kingston said it is naive to think the profit motive alone will guarantee safe food.
'Any inspector who has been around for a while can tell many stories that disprve that theory,' he said. 'If the profit motive caused business people to act in their best long-term interests, we wouldn't have a worldwide banking crisis right now.
"The listeriosis crisis that claimed the lives of at least 20 Caadians last summer and fall could have bee prevented, according to the President of the Agriculture Union, a component of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC).
Bob Kingston told the annual convention of the National Farmers' Union (NFU) that the deregulation of feed safety inspections jeopardizes the health of Canadians.
Kingston said that, prior to the listeriosis outbreak, a Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) employee was fired for letting his union see a confidential letter that was sent by the federal Treasury Board to the CFIA.
'This letter outline future Harper government plans to cut back on inspections in slaughter facilities' he said. 'They were proposing to shift fulltime meat inspection to just an oversight role.'
Kingston said the changes to the inspection system were brought in after much lobbying by the food industry to reduce government monitoring.
'When the HAACP quality management systems were introduced in meat processing plants, the large companies such as Maple Leaf argued that having these programs in place should mean less inspection, because they were now in a position to ensure compliance with health requirements on their own.
Kingston said the inspection system is 'overburdened' because inspectors have too much paperwork and too many facilities to cover to enable them to do effective inspections.
'In the old days, the inspectors would have slowed down a production line until the problem was fixed. They would have had a chat with the foreman and they would have corrected the problem before they even left the plant. But that doesn't happen any more. Instead of their conducting regular pre-operation or sanitation inspections, the plant employees now do these inspections themselves, with the CFIA inspectors reading about it when they get the time.'
Under the old system, Kingston added, processing plants were automatically required to report positive listeria finds to the inspector in charge, but under the new system that is no longer a requirement.
Some observers still believe there is nothing wrong with food companies regulating themselves, given that it is so obviously in a company's best interests not to make their customers giet sick or die. But Kingston said it is naive to think the profit motive alone will guarantee safe food.
'Any inspector who has been around for a while can tell many stories that disprve that theory,' he said. 'If the profit motive caused business people to act in their best long-term interests, we wouldn't have a worldwide banking crisis right now.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Economy of Lies?
Would you tell a big, fat lie to get a job? Have you been bold-faced lied to in an interview? This past few weeks I've had more than the usual number of people lying to me in an interivew. What gives?
I think most managers realize that there will always be candidates that tell white lies, exaggerate their experience or make up a degree in the interview process. It's an understandable failing in confidence. However, since our "economic downturn", I've seem to have had an unusual number of people tell big lies that have had big consequences. Is there a correlation between bigger lies and the economy?
I'm not sure what's the issue but it's a real issue to me. When I call a candidate, it's my intention to do whatever I can, with all my knowledge and resources, to help that person find a position that will satisfy them and make them want to get up in the morning happy to go to work. Not just to pay the bills, not just to put in time, but to be truly happy. Sometimes that means putting what I would like to see happen aside. I take a personal interest in seeing candidates succeed. So, when someone tells me a big whopper it really chaps my hide. Let me explain.
I spoke with a guy this past week that seemed straight up, knowledgable, and ernest in his desire to work with a good company. I put him forward to the client. He was asked if he applied for a position with this company previously to which he replied, "no". My client let me know they had spoken to him directly before just three months ago and another recruiter put him forward recently as well. To add to the issue, there was someone else similar and I thought my client was confusing the two candidates. Here's the rub. I told my client he was confusing them and please take a look again because, by now, the candidate had twice said he didn't apply previously. In the end, my client sent an email the candidate wrote to him. Busted.
Busted, but to his credit, this candidate actually apologized for his lie and the trouble it caused. In the end however, this lie caused the most trouble for the candidate and it will carry with him for future career searches. That's too bad because he really needs a job in these tough times. Tough times can lead to drastic measures but do the means justify the ends?
If he reads this blog, or someone else who's tempted to lie to get a job does, let me end by quotingBuddha who said,"the only real failure in life is not to be true to the best one knows".
I think most managers realize that there will always be candidates that tell white lies, exaggerate their experience or make up a degree in the interview process. It's an understandable failing in confidence. However, since our "economic downturn", I've seem to have had an unusual number of people tell big lies that have had big consequences. Is there a correlation between bigger lies and the economy?
I'm not sure what's the issue but it's a real issue to me. When I call a candidate, it's my intention to do whatever I can, with all my knowledge and resources, to help that person find a position that will satisfy them and make them want to get up in the morning happy to go to work. Not just to pay the bills, not just to put in time, but to be truly happy. Sometimes that means putting what I would like to see happen aside. I take a personal interest in seeing candidates succeed. So, when someone tells me a big whopper it really chaps my hide. Let me explain.
I spoke with a guy this past week that seemed straight up, knowledgable, and ernest in his desire to work with a good company. I put him forward to the client. He was asked if he applied for a position with this company previously to which he replied, "no". My client let me know they had spoken to him directly before just three months ago and another recruiter put him forward recently as well. To add to the issue, there was someone else similar and I thought my client was confusing the two candidates. Here's the rub. I told my client he was confusing them and please take a look again because, by now, the candidate had twice said he didn't apply previously. In the end, my client sent an email the candidate wrote to him. Busted.
Busted, but to his credit, this candidate actually apologized for his lie and the trouble it caused. In the end however, this lie caused the most trouble for the candidate and it will carry with him for future career searches. That's too bad because he really needs a job in these tough times. Tough times can lead to drastic measures but do the means justify the ends?
If he reads this blog, or someone else who's tempted to lie to get a job does, let me end by quotingBuddha who said,"the only real failure in life is not to be true to the best one knows".
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Seriously Funny Japanese Drinks
If you've got a thirst for adventure, Japan is where you want to be.
Below is a list of soft drinks and beverages launched in Japan.....
Hot Calpis: the drink that makes you think - about NOT drinking it
Cue suave voiceover: "Next time you're out on the town with the one you love, treat her to a cup of Hot Calpis"... then trudge home alone after she pours it over your head. Yes, delicious Calpis - I can't even read it without grinning - is known as Calpico in other countries (for obvious reasons) and is one of Japan's most popular and enduring soft drinks .
Coolpis: Who wouldn't want to drink something with a name like Coolpis?
Ahh, refreshing Coolpis... THE soft drink to offer guests - before removing their blindfolds. Actually a Korean copy of the disturbingly named Calpis, Coolpis comes in Peach flavor and Kimchee flavor. Anyone for a Calpis vs. Coolpis taste test? We could call it a pis-ing contest.
Next,consider Water Salad... for what, we're not sure...
Water Salad is... well... salad-flavored water. You know, the stuff you get after centrifuging your rinsed romaine in the salad spinner. Funny, we pour it down the drain here; in Japan they can it and put it up for sale in a varied selection of flavors.
Diet Water: all the taste and none of the calories of regular water. Huh?
And now, from the "selling ice to the Eskimos" department, we bring you Diet Water: the soft drink for the soft headed. "None of that rich, fattening Perrier for me, I'm serious about shedding pounds!" Not to mention shedding money. "Diet Water of the rich and famous"? We're not sure what the appeal of Diet Water is... maybe it has negative calories.
Canned Coffee = Canned Laughter
Canned coffee has been a staple of those omnipresent Japanese drink vending machines since the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. Nothing wrong with the coffee itself, which is actually quite good. It's the wacky names (c/o engrish.com ) the manufacturers insist on giving it that elevates Japanese canned coffee.
BM Coffee - Nothing beats a good BM to start the day!
BJ Coffee - I stand corrected.
Deepresso Coffee - Is this the opposite of Espresso, or a coffee designed to bring down Type A personalities?
And that wraps up our list of bizarre Japanese Soft Drinks (from inventorspot[dot]com). Japan sure is a wonderful place.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
An Interview or CSI Investigation?
As a recruiter in hospitality for many years, I've been privy to the interview mindset of clients looking for new management and executive candidates. While various styles of interviewing come and go, has it ever seemed to you more like a criminal investigation?
If you said, "Yes!", there's good reason it seemed that way. In my experience, some intervieews approach the interview with the vigour of the most experienced CSI Investigator, as though they just picked you up off the street holding a smoking gun and pleading innocence.
The conductor of this type of interview has taken passion for their work to a new level and lost the primary intention of an interview: to tease the best from the candidate, not the worst. They take great efforts to ask the most obscure questions, give test questions that are not at all related to the position, and probe into your home or personal life. All with the aim to find information to use against you. Amazingly, when an interview becomes criminal it's often not because of anything the candidate has done, but because the interviewee has gone far beyond the probing behavioural question.
Too often an interviewer may wander in with a test in hand and ask you to complete it. It doesn't matter that you'll never be expected to know more than half the answers in relation to the job.
Let's not forget the computer savvy that crawl over the internet for clever and obscure questions that appear to test the candidates' ability to solve problems under pressure. Even working in the front line of the busiest restaurant where the pressure is intense, you'll not likely be in a life and death wine corking horror: it just doesn't happen.
Let's be honest, if a candidate is a proficient liar, the interview is not where you'll catch them out: you're just going to catch normal people making small mistakes. Just like you and I do. And you wouldn't want your career to hang on one small mistake, would you?
So, instead of trying to find ways to trip up candidates, let's remember the first rule of interviewing: show the candidate the same level of respect that you'd want to be shown. Be pleasant and courteous and make an effort to put the candidate at ease: that way you'll get far more out of the interview and you'll be able to make an informed decision when it comes to making the final choice.
Of course one must take into account the business culture and whether or not the person sitting across from you can fit in and you should be able to determine that during the course of a well conducted interview and this should also form an important part of the decision making process.
Remember that first impressions are important and go both ways: just as you'd be aghast if a candidate walked in wearing shorts and sneakers, think about the impression you're making on them. You are the front-line representative of your business. Observe the fundamentals and the interview process should be more rewarding and fruitful. After all, even the ccused criminal on CSI gets a phone call.
If you said, "Yes!", there's good reason it seemed that way. In my experience, some intervieews approach the interview with the vigour of the most experienced CSI Investigator, as though they just picked you up off the street holding a smoking gun and pleading innocence.
The conductor of this type of interview has taken passion for their work to a new level and lost the primary intention of an interview: to tease the best from the candidate, not the worst. They take great efforts to ask the most obscure questions, give test questions that are not at all related to the position, and probe into your home or personal life. All with the aim to find information to use against you. Amazingly, when an interview becomes criminal it's often not because of anything the candidate has done, but because the interviewee has gone far beyond the probing behavioural question.
Too often an interviewer may wander in with a test in hand and ask you to complete it. It doesn't matter that you'll never be expected to know more than half the answers in relation to the job.
Let's not forget the computer savvy that crawl over the internet for clever and obscure questions that appear to test the candidates' ability to solve problems under pressure. Even working in the front line of the busiest restaurant where the pressure is intense, you'll not likely be in a life and death wine corking horror: it just doesn't happen.
Let's be honest, if a candidate is a proficient liar, the interview is not where you'll catch them out: you're just going to catch normal people making small mistakes. Just like you and I do. And you wouldn't want your career to hang on one small mistake, would you?
So, instead of trying to find ways to trip up candidates, let's remember the first rule of interviewing: show the candidate the same level of respect that you'd want to be shown. Be pleasant and courteous and make an effort to put the candidate at ease: that way you'll get far more out of the interview and you'll be able to make an informed decision when it comes to making the final choice.
Of course one must take into account the business culture and whether or not the person sitting across from you can fit in and you should be able to determine that during the course of a well conducted interview and this should also form an important part of the decision making process.
Remember that first impressions are important and go both ways: just as you'd be aghast if a candidate walked in wearing shorts and sneakers, think about the impression you're making on them. You are the front-line representative of your business. Observe the fundamentals and the interview process should be more rewarding and fruitful. After all, even the ccused criminal on CSI gets a phone call.
Monday, May 04, 2009
When You Don't Tip Housekeeping Staff....
Did you ever wonder what kinds of things happen when you're not in your hotel room? This short clip might give you an idea for those that don't tip the housekeeping staff....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)