Posted by Glenn Messick on January 05, 1999 at 23:04:49:
Once upon a time I worked 90 hour work weeks. I fully appreciate the need for dedicated culinarians at all levels of the cooking game, from the under paid line cook at the seasonal seafood restaurant on the coast of NJ, to the highly regarded 4 star executive chefs in the big hotels in New York City.One aspect of our business I refuse to accept is the belief that a chef has to be in the kitchen every waking hour or he isnt dedicated, or is somehow inferior.I've done the "no day off for 14 straight weeks, and I'm gonna stab someone soon " circuit, and it is not for me. I love this business, and I wouldnt leave it for anything, its just that there is more to my life than food costs, scheduling, finding a qualified saucier, the canceled reservations for the Johnson reception, or the broken infra-red bricks in the broiler.I have a life outside this game, and I'll be damned if I'll give it up!!! I hunt , I fish, I play music, I read. I've had streches where I havent even left the restaurant for 3 whole days, sleeping on piles of linens on a prep table. I think that the days of the chef as an example of how to burn yourself out is over.The place I run now, I have 2 days off and work an average of 60 hours a week. We(2 cooks, 2 prep guys, and myself, plus 2 dishwashers) put out beautiful food for 200 on an average night, 250 weekends, with not a container of base in sight.I work a 10 burner sautee station, a cook to my right does broiled entrees,and they guy to my left does apps, and two entree items. Its all natural classical stocks, with a premium placed on freshness of product. I am VERYproud of the product we put out, and I dont have to kill myself to do it.I think chefs ( some folks I've read here talking about 100 hour weeks, please) everywhere need to rethink their stand on the whole "iron man " chef mentality.I for one refuse to kill myself for a matter of labor cost. I'd like to here your thoughts on this subject.