BARTENDER THEFT:

Great Article about bartender theft written by industry leading author Robert Plotkin. If you haven’t read any of Plotkin’s book, you should. They are very informative and a must read. Here is his website: http://www.barmedia.com/

Spotting the Fingerprints of Theft
May 8, 2012 By: Robert Plotkin

Do you have a problem with theft behind the bar? Many in the bar business do. But if you’re waiting for a rise in your pour cost to alert you to a potential problem, you may be out of luck.

Tracking pour cost has long been the accepted way of detecting bartender theft. However, there are more ways to steal from a bar that won’t have the  slightest affect on pour cost. In fact, a clever thief can steal from your bar and actually make your pour cost percentage drop.

Pour cost analyzes the relationship between cost and sales. If a bartender serves a drink and pockets the cash proceeds, he’s basically increasing cost without increasing sales, which will cause pour cost to rise. While the increase may be imperceptible, pour cost will rise. If the bartender then replaces the stolen ounce of liquor with an equal amount of water, pour cost will remain unaffected.

Substitutions are examples of a type of theft that won’t cause pour cost to rise. The scam involves a bartender making drinks with well liquor instead of call brands, charging customers call prices and pocketing the difference. Because the bartender poured well liquor and registered the transaction as a well sale, pour cost remains unaffected.

Underpouring schemes are another example. A bartender short pours a series of four drinks by a quarter of an ounce, thereby creating a surplus ounce of liquor. The bartender then sells that shot of liquor and pockets the cash. Again, pour cost is unaffected.

While measuring your pour cost is a smart thing to do, it’s not enough. If the early detection of internal theft is important to you, there’s more you should know.

With nearly all types of theft behind the bar, one thing is certain: The cash proceeds are not ending up in the register. Regardless of the scam, the money winds up in the bartenders’ pockets. So to spot the first signs of theft, look at sales.

Bar productivity measures bartender sales per hour and is computed by dividing the shift’s gross sales by the number of hours the bartender worked. There are two aspects to tracking productivity: calculating the staff’s average sales per hour figured on a weekly basis and computing the daily sales per hour figures for each shift.

Calculating the staff’s productivity involves totaling the bar’s gross sales and dividing them by the total bartenders’ payroll hours for the week. It’s advisable to calculate the day shift’s average sales per hour separately from the night staff’s average. Because there is often a considerable difference between the two figures, calculating the day shift’s productivity separately from the night shift’s makes the analysis more relevant.

For example, if the two night bartenders rang in $6,935 in sales for the week and clocked in a combined 83 payroll hours, the staff average for the night crew works out to $83.55 per hour. During the day, the bartending staff rang-in $2,250 is sales and worked 40.5 hours for a staff average of $55.55 per hour.
The second aspect of productivity is tracking sales per hour for each shift during the week. To illustrate, two bartenders work on Thursday night. “Jim” works six hours a

nd rings in sales of $542 or $90.34 per hour. Adam, working six and a half hours at the same bar on the same night, registers sales of $442, which translates to $68.15 per hour.

Keep a journal or spreadsheet and track productivity figures for each shift on an on-going basis. After several weeks, patterns will emerge. It soon will become evident who are your sales leaders and who fall consistently short of the staff average.

Explanations for Low Productivity

If a bartender’s sales per hour come in consistently below the staff average, five things are possible. One, he may move too slowly and literally can’t keep up with de

mand. Two, he could make lousy drinks, so people don’t stick around. Three, his personality and attitude could be so off-putting that customers leave early. Four, his sales ability could be so unrefined that he consistently undersells. Or five, he could be stealing.

How do you know which it is? Take some time and observe the person. Does he move quickly and with purpose? Or is he more laid back and sluggish? If the person can’t keep up behind the bar, then you’ve identified an area in which he needs to improve.

If that’s not a problem, does it appear as if he has the necessary skills for the job? Do his drinks look good, or are they frequently returned? Does the bartender have a good personality for the job? Does it seem as if he has a positive working attitude? Does he exhibit good sales ability?
If none of these things seem to be a problem, he may be stealing. Regardless of the scam, theft takes a toll on productivity. Tracking productivity can prove to be an invaluable management tool. Between pour cost and bar productivity, there isn’t a scam or fraud that you can’t catch.


Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint

hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299

Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811
© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

·       Bartender 1: white female with brunette hair, wearing a xxxxxx hat, black top, and cut off jean shorts.

·       Bartender 2: white female with light blond hair, several tattoos, wearing a black xxxxxx hat, red top, and cut off jean shorts.

·       Bartender 3: white female with blond hair, wearing a tan xxxxxx hat, white top, and cut off jean shorts.

·       Bartender 4: white female with blond hair, wearing a white xxxxxx hat, pink top, and cut off jean shorts.

·       Bartender 5: white female with dark hair, wearing a pink xxxxxx hat, black top, and cut off jean shorts. Observed mainly in the service bar area.

·       Bartender 6: white female with dark blond hair, wearing a light colored xxxxxx hat, white top, and cut off jean shorts. Observed mainly in the service bar area.

·       Beer Tub Bartender 1: white female with a dark xxxxxx hat, wearing a blue hoodie.

·       Barback 1: (possibly a busser as he was never observed behind the bar area) white male with short dark hair, rough facial hair, thick glasses, tattoo on neck, stocky build, wearing a dark baseball hat and black Xxxxxx Xxxxxx t-shirt.

·       Barback 2: white male with a reddish goatee, thin build, wearing a baseball hat and dark Xxxxxx Xxxxxx t-shirt.

·       Barback 3: white male with a xxxxxxxxxxx, wearing a red baseball hat, and dark t-shirt.

At no point in the evening did any bartender give their name, the music was loud and although every bartender approached the agent and associate in a friendly manner no small talk was exchanged. Furthermore it appeared that all of the bartenders were working together to service the entire bar so each one was seen in different parts of the bar area providing service to whoever appeared to be next in line. Upon closing out each tab the server name on all the checks was simply “Bar.”

Jack Daniels appeared to be hosting a special that evening in that there appeared to be a gentleman described as a white male with a beard, wearing a black xxxxxx hat, black suit with the Jack Daniels logo sewn into the breast area of his coat, and black xxxxxx boots. This individual was observed to be buying drinks for people that wanted to try Jack Daniels. Furthermore, there was a life-sized statue of Jack Daniels in the northwest area of the inside of this establishment.

Upon approaching the bar the agent and associate had to wait in a large crowd of people standing next to the bar. Bartender 1 approached us and due to the loud music, did not introduce herself, she did take our drink order with a smile.

Although we had ordered drinks from the eastern area of the bar closest to the doorway, Bartender 1 rang up the drinks on the western cash register/POS terminal. Agent found this behavior odd; however, it might be assigned registers too.

The drinks were promptly made with the appropriate pour and paid for using a credit card (see food and beverage summary for details). The tab was quickly closed and although no itemized receipt was given at this time, it was accurate in price as compared to the same rounds later placed.

that at any given point had approximately 5 female bartenders and 1 to 2 male barbacks and throughout the evening the bartenders and cocktail waitresses would take turns dancing on either of the poles for a duration of one to several songs. Patrons were observed giving these individuals dollar bills which they displayed in their garter belts.

Upon signaling the bartenders for the second round of drinks, Bartender 2 was observed to take our order. She made the drinks with the appropriate pour count, told us the price, grabbed the agent’s credit card, rang up and cashed out this round in the same manner as Bartender 1.

The agent and associate made their way to the patio area where the crowd was just as thick as it was inside. The agent observed the Beer Tub Bartender 1 opening beer bottles for patrons and closing out to cash their orders using a cash drawer. The Beer Tub Bartender 1 was observed making appropriate change for her customers, and she was observed using a cash drawer behind her station. At no point during our observations did we see her misuse either the cash drawer or her tip bucket.

While on the patio, Barback 1 was observed servicing the patio, where he was observed picking up a small collection of glassware near the exit to this establishment.

Round three was placed with Bartender 3, who again and also prepared the drinks with the appropriate level of pour. The tab was left open at this point and it was secured with a credit card.

Barback 2 and Barback 3 were frequently observed behind the bar clearing empty glassware and stocking ice using the appropriate ice receptacles. The bar area was frequently cleared of empty and discarded glassware. There were a few water spots on the bar top in the heavily traffic areas of the bar area.

While the bartenders and cocktail servers took turns dancing to songs on the stripper poles they were observed drinking from plastic water bottles that they brought up to the strippers poles with them.

Bartender 4 took the next round, and again poured the appropriate count for mixed drinks for both our order and all the other orders the agent had observed her make. The drinks were presented and promptly added to our drink tab.

Bartender 5 was observed primarily in the northern service bar area that doubled as a location for patrons to order drinks. The agent had observed Bartender 5 make several drink orders all of which were poured at the appropriate pour count however no ice scoop was used. This is an AZ Health Code violation.

Bartender 6 took our next round which upon placing the drinks in front of the agent had asked for payment that was a dollar over what the final bill had stated (see food and beverage summary for details). The agent mentioned that there was a tab open so payment at this time was not taken, but the order was promptly rang up on our tab.

Beverage Summary

DO NOT POST THIS SECTION TO STAFF

SPOTTER ANONYMITY WILL BE COMPROMISED

The agent and associate had ordered four rounds of drinks during this evening’s experience, the rounds consisted of a pint of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and a Jack and Coke. The xxxxxxxxxxxx were consistently poured with no excessive head to the beer and consistently served in a chilled glass. No size description was ever offered when the orders were placed and the agent felt that either they were just serving the largest size or there was no different sizes offered. Upon observing other patrons, no one else had seemed to be drinking beer from various sized glasses. The Jack Daniels, as well as every other mixed drink observed being prepared behind the bar this evening, was poured at the appropriate four count. The rocks glasses were clean and free of any chipping.

The final round which was placed through Bartender 6 was two waters, no choice as to type of water was given, Bartender 6 returned from the refrigerator with two glass bottles of Voss Still Water, which although hefty in price were very refreshing. Plastic water bottles were observed being drank by the bartenders as they werexxxxx xxx xxxxx, so the option although possibly not provided to the patrons, was there. When Bartender 6 placed the two unopened water bottles in front of the agent she had asked for payment of $9. The agent mentioned that he had a tab open and she added these two drinks. When the final bill was presented the total for these two bottles of water was only $8. Either Bartender 6 did not know the price of these two drinks or she was overcharging for these items - buck boosting cash transactions.
At 12:41 AM, while the agent and associate were waiting for Bartender 6 to take their order she was observed to pour 4 shots; 3 of Jagermeister and one of a clear liquid (probably vodka or rum). Bartender 6 placed these drinks in front of four male patrons standing next to us and was overheard saying that these were for waiting so patiently. Bartender 6 was never observed receiving any form of payment for these drinks, nor was she observed ringing these items up on a comp tab.

Upon the conclusion of our experience Bartender 4 retrieved our tab and credit card which was accurately itemized and accurate in price in comparison to the other orders placed. It was at this point that the agent realized that Bartender 6 would have overcharged for our last round had we not already had a tab open.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811
© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

·       Bartender:  Xxxxxx, Latin female, about 5’5” tall, medium thin build, shoulder length straight brown hair, wearing a black bikini top, jean shorts, and flip flops.

Agent and associate were unable to procure a seat at the bar during this evaluation because the seats were taken the whole time.  But agent did observe some things while sitting at one of the tables.

When agent first arrived both Xxxxxx the bartender and Xxxxxx the waitress were seen waiting on tables and making drinks.  Xxxxxx was the only one seen pouring alcohol.  Xxxxxx was only seen getting her own water and sodas.

At 3:18 PM a man walked in and was standing under the projection screen looking around, Xxxxxx asked him if he needed a table and he said yes, and went and sat at the lone table by the lounge area.  Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx and Xxxxxx walked past him, each at least once if not several times and no one waited on him.  Agent is unsure whose section this was as Xxxxxx was waiting on the high top tables and Xxxxxx was waiting on the booths.  (Please refer to the waitress summary)

At 3:32 Xxxxxx put an order into the POS the receipt came up and Xxxxxx had her back turned flirting with some male customers.  After 2 minutes of Xxxxxx standing there, Xxxxxx finally turned around and saw her there.  Xxxxxx then served a customer 3 shots, another customer a draft beer, then made Xxxxxx’s drinks, and then reported to the POS.  Xxxxxx was seen cluster ordering on several different occasions during this evaluation.  She did not report directly to the POS after making a drink order.

On a few occasions Xxxxxx would yell out to the guys at the tables and ask if they want shots.   Xxxxxx was seen making and serving these shots to the guys and some people at the bar she obviously knew.  Agent did not observe these shots to ever be recorded or paid for because Xxxxxx did not report directly to the POS.

Xxxxxx was only seen using an ice scoop to put ice into a baggy for someone.  Dirty glasses were stacking up on one side of the bar.  It was rather busy, Xxxxxx seemed to keep up well, when she was working and not flirting. She was very friendly and had a great personality. She seemed to enjoy her job, and everyone seemed to like her.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811
© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

·       Bartender 1:  Caucasian female, 5’6”, with an average build. She had blonde/brown wavy hair worn in a pony tail. She wore a black XXXX top with black pants.

·       Bartender 2: Caucasian male, 6’, with a stocky build. He had brown hair with a slight beard. He wore a red XXXX polo shirt and jeans.

·       Bartender 3: Caucasian female, 5’5”, with an average build. She had long black hair work half pulled into a pony tail. She wore a white blouse and black pants.

·       Bartender 4: Caucasian female, 5'5”, with an average build. She had long brown hair worn straight and in a pony tail. She wore a white blouse and black pants.

As the agent approached the xxxxx bar he found seating available at a very busy bar. Bartenders 1 and 2 were serving a nearly full bar, as well as people standing at nearby bar tables. The two bartenders seemed to work efficiently and well together.

Neither bartender offered their name to the agent.

A few seconds after being seating Bartender 2 greeted the agent and offered a beverage. The agent ordered a cocktail, and Bartender 2 failed to ask for a liquor preference. He did check the agent's identification. I am frequently asked for ID.

Bartender 2 quickly prepared the drink with quite the heavy pour, one bordering on a 6 count. As the agent watched Bartender 2 through the evening he appeared to have a heavy hand on most pours.

As he provided the agent the beverage he also offered a menu; he would return about ten minutes later to see if any food would be ordered. No credit card was collected from the agent to start a tab. After watching, the agent deemed that both bartenders were picking and choosing who they required a credit card of to start a tab.

It seemed that each bartender had that own side of the bar which they were responsible for serving. They would regularly crossover into each other's sides when necessary however. Bartender 1 was predominantly seen working at the far end of the bar, while Bartender 2 was serving guests at the end closest to the front entrance.

In addition to serving guests Bartender 2 was also responsible for pouring server's drinks. The agent noticed a couple disturbing trends as far as server tickets went.

The first being that Bartenders 1 and 2 seemed to lack any awareness and urgency to make server tickets. Many tickets sat for a great deal of time before either being poured or before a server shouted across the bar to get a bartenders attention.

Secondly, with server drinks as well as bar guests drinks, Bartender 2 had an unsanitary habit of handling drinks by the rim of the glass. And lastly, it seemed that the standard was to place the physical ticket in the drink itself.

Cleanliness as a whole was also an issue at the first floor bar. While Bartender 2 did wipe down the section of the bar where the agent sat down, the remainder of the bar top stayed filled with empty glassware, trash and soiled dishware. These cleanliness issues duplicated themselves at the high top tables in the bar area. A barback/busser was on duty however he was not seen doing much to maintain cleanliness standards either.

The agent observed Bartender 1 mostly from afar due to the large crowd filling her end of the bar. During his time at the bar, the agent did observe a couple of possible integrity/theft issues.

The first occurring at 9:30pm when Bartender 1 poured a full 9 count cocktail for a guest at the far end of the bar then failed to ring anything in.

Also, at 9:45pm both bartenders worked to prepare several shots for some regulars sitting at the bar. These shots also appeared to go unaccounted for.

More disturbing than these two occasions was the minuscule amount of time both bartenders visited the POS to ring things in. For the amount of drinks leaving the bar, neither bartender visited the POS nearly enough. Bartenders 1 and 2 may have accounted for the two integrity issues listed above, however it would be difficult to figure that since the general practice was not to ring drinks in immediately after serving them. It's very hard to assess theft issues if the bartenders are rarely ringing in the drinks directly after they make them.

Agent highly suggests management instruct the bartenders on a make a drink - ring a drink policy and strictly enforce it. The system in place of delayed rings and group/batch ordering is a sieve for bartender theft opportunity.

Both Bartenders 1 and 2 were very friendly and helpful with the agent. Bartender 2 was present to offer additional beverages when appropriate and had a friendly farewell for the agent as he departed.

Moving to the Xxxxx bar, the agent was abruptly met by Bartender 3. Before offering any sort of friendly greeting, she quickly asked if the agent was just upstairs to smoke or to drink. Her approach was a bit abrasive and did not create an environment in which the agent would wish to stay. Nevertheless, the agent ordered a beverage for which Bartender 3 started a tab. She asked the agent's name to start a tab but did not offer hers in return.

Bartender 3 had maybe one or two empty seats at her bar and a mostly empty dining room with exception of one table. Rather than taking the opportunity to chat with her guests, the agent observed Bartender 3 being mostly stand-offish.

Shortly thereafter two more guests came upstairs and attempted to order drinks. The guest inquired how tabs worked at the separate bars, asking if they were connected or if he would need to close each one separately. Bartender 3 once again responded in poor manners with a short, rude, curt response that simply wasn't necessary.

With not much happening at the second floor bar, the agent closed his tab and moved to the third floor bar. He quickly found a spot at the bar. It was quite some time before Bartender 4 greeted the agent which was only after he asked for a menu.

The agent believes this delay in service to be due to the fact that he still had a beverage in his hand from the downstairs bar. The agent observed this pattern recur at the 2nd and 3rd floor bar throughout the night. While a guest may not need a drink at the moment, good service standards dictate that employees greet all guests or perhaps offer a menu.

After the initial point of contact, Bartender 4 was helpful, friendly and attentive. The agent observed Bartender 4's pour count which were accurate. She had quite a few guests at the bar to serve and was quick to account for all drinks.

Bartender 4 asked for a credit card to start a tab. She returned at appropriate times to offer additional drinks and to inquire if the agent needed a menu. She did not offer her name to the agent.

Food and beverage service from Bartender 4 was quick and well-timed. During her spare time the bartender kept busy by organizing the bar, rearranging bottles, and insuring that the bar top was clean.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811
© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary                                                          

• Bar 1:  Caucasian female approximately 5’6 with a slender frame and shoulder length brown hair wearing a black tank top and jeans.

 The agent and associate took a seat at the bar top and were greeted by Bar 1.  She provided water glasses and a carafe of water and stood in front of us waiting for a drink order to be placed.  She did not provide a friendlier greeting including welcoming us or verbally asking what we would like to drink.  We requested a minute to look at the wine list.

She returned a short time later and asked “What do ya think.” which is much too casual of a statement for the nature of the establishment in the agent’s opinion.

A drink order was placed and made quickly (see food and beverage summary for details).  She did not use beverage napkins for the drinks even though there were beverage napkins neatly placed on the bar top nearby.

She did not report to the POS to start us a tab or place an itemized chit in front of us.  In fact, no guests at the bar had chits in front of them on the bar top.            

Approximately 35 minutes after the drinks were ordered Bar 1 rang in our drinks, printed the check and placed it in front of us on the bar in a check presenter.  The agent understands the house policy of providing guests a receipt after items are ordered but felt Bar 1’s method was more similar to auto dropping the check as it was presented in a presenter. Agent points out that this methodology is sieve of opportunity for bartender theft and suggests that management address it. Moreover, it's very cumbersome to "spot" for bartender theft if the bartender simply isn't ringing in drinks.

 She did not ask us of another round was wanted and the agent’s beverage was nearly empty.

 The agent provided payment and it sat on the presenter for approximately 5 minutes before it was processed which surprised the agent since Bar 1 was so quick to drop the check she had no rush to process the payment for the agent.  She thanked us in-genuinely in the agent’s opinion and quickly picked up the presenter to collect her tip. 

She did not acknowledge us as we left which made for a poor last impression in the agent’s opinion.

 Overall the agent felt Bar 1 was not very friendly towards the agent and associate.  She only seemed interested in conversing with guests she already knew. 

 She was observed eating food off of guests’ plates behind the bar while on duty and in view of guests. 

 She also consumed wine regularly while on duty behind the bar which is a violation of the Liquor Law.  She was not discreet in any way.  She kept a glass of red wine by the open bottle she was pouring from on the back bar.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.

The agent noted Bar 1 doing side work preparing to end her shift.  She was cleaning glassware and refilling mixers in pour containers.  She was marrying the mixers in pour containers that were already in use which is ill advised in the agent’s opinion.  The agent recommends new pour containers be used when prepping mixers so that the oldest product get used first. 

 To protect spotter anonymity further details from the bar evaluation can be found in the food and beverage summary.

 Neither the agent nor the associate were asked for ID.  One of which is very near 21; therefore, this is a dram shop liquor liability issue that should be addressed by management.

The agent and associate were the only guests aside from regulars and employees at the bar top.  To protect anonymity further details from the evaluation are as follows:

There was an instance of poor guest service observed with Bar 1.  At approximately 10:36 two guests entered the establishment.  She immediately told the guests the establishment closed at 10 and they left the establishment rather disappointed.  She did not attempt to invite them to the bar top to enjoy a cocktail or state they should definitely come back before 10 to sample the cuisine.

The agent made a call prior to visiting the establishment that was not used for scoring purposes.  The agent inquired about the hours the kitchen and establishment were open until to insure ample time to perform both a dining room and bar evaluations.  The employee that answered the call stated the kitchen closed at 10PM but the establishment closed at 11PM.  The instance of Bar 1 turning guests away decreases revenue from the establishment and also could possibly deter the guests from returning which is bad for the establishment as a whole in the agent’s opinion.  The agent feels all guests entering the establishment should be provided good customer service and be invited into the establishment during hours of operation even if it is close to closing time and staff is ready to end their shifts.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary -                    

·        Bartender – “Xxxxx” (as shown on nametag and bar receipt) female Caucasian, blond with hair up in a high pony tail, xxx feet tall, slender, approximately XX years old.                                   

Agent and associate were promptly greeted by the bartender with “hi guys, what can I get you to drink?” She was wiping down the bar refilling cups of peanuts and placed cocktail napkins in front of each of us. She was smiling energetic and upbeat.

Agent and associate ordered drinks and she immediately mixed the drinks and returned. Agent noticed that the drink was made by turning the bottle over twice and a little more. Bouncing these bottles circumvents the purpose in which they were made which delivers more alcohol than what is prescribed and therefore may constitute a bar theft occurrence. 

Xxxxx did not introduce herself to us by name but she was very friendly and outgoing. Xxxxx was not only responsible for the guests at the bar but also making the drinks for the cocktail staff and server staff in the dining room.

Agent was not able to tell exactly when Xxxxx rang up the drinks as we were not given a receipt at any time during the visit. Agent noticed that none of the guests at the bar had a receipt in front of them.

Agent recommends using the make a drink ring a drink policy and placing the receipt in front of the guest in a small glass. This will ensure that all drinks are accounted for. Especially in the event when there are other employees behind the bar.

Agent and associate ordered another round of drinks and each time the drinks were placed on white cocktail napkins but not immediately rang up.

Agent and associate later ordered dinner and Xxxxx immediately turned and went to the POS and rang in the order. Prior to the food arriving (20 min. later) Xxxxx placed napkins and silverware and salt and pepper shakers on the bar.

Xxxxx seemed to work well with the other staff and was very personable with all the guests at the bar especially the men.

Listed below are some general observations agent made during the visit;

Xxxxx use the ice scoop to make every drink except for glasses of water which were in plastic cups, she scooped the cup directly into the ice.

Xxxxx was very attentive in offering additional drinks for everyone at the bar and refilling waters. (See food and beverage section)

Agent was able to observe every drink poured. Xxxxx tips the bottle a minimum of two times for each drink sometimes up to four and even five times.

Xxxxx left the bar unattended many times and agent observed the cocktail server ( female Caucasian blonde hair in bun) coming behind the bar each time Xxxxx left as well as a couple servers from the dining room coming behind the bar to retrieve beverage orders. Agent felt that this was rather lax and a real loop hole for possible bar theft integrity issues.

In agents opinion no one but the bartender on duty should ever be behind the bar unless it was a manager. If the bartender needs to leave the bar the staff should know that they are not allowed back there for any reason whatsoever. If the bartender needs something from the kitchen the bartender should have one of the other service staff retrieve the item for them. If the bartender needs to leave the bar unattended they should call the MOD to cover.

Xxxxx was away from the bar at about 6:44 about 5 minutes and returned with a plastic bag of a purchase from the gift shop and a small clear plastic container with fruit. She proceeded to eat the fruit during the visit, turning around away from the guests facing the POS while eating.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary                                                                          

• Bartender:  Caucasian female with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wearing a xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

Agent took a seat at the bar and was greeted within seconds.  The bartender approached with a smile and a cardboard coaster in hand and asked what I would like to drink.  Agent stalled in an attempt to get an offer on the specials if any, but to no avail.  Agent did hear the bartender knowledgably list the numerous specials later in the evaluation after being asked. 

For best customer service, agent feels that bartenders should automatically offer specials particularly when the guest is unsure of what they would like.  At no time did the bartender ask agent if it was their 1st time at the establishment, nor was she overheard asking anyone else.

Agent noted that the bartender had her beer key shoved in the side of her bikini bottom directly against her skin which is an AZ Health Code violation.  Agent suggests strategically placing bottle openers behind the bar if they aren’t already.

When agent’s drink was about 90% empty the bartender approached and offered something new.  Throughout the evaluation the bartender was good about offering new drinks before the guest was completely empty which is an excellent practice.  Eye Spy suggests following the 75% rule which is to always offer a new beverage to guests when it is 75% empty because it helps prevent guests sitting with empty drinks if the establishment is very busy or the staff has a distraction.

During the evaluation agent observed the bartender eating at the north end of the bar standing behind it.  There was a guest eating the food, which appeared to be from Streets of New York, with her as well. 

The bartender was observed standing behind the bar doing what appeared to be texting and also holding her phone while speaking with a bar guest.  On one occasion the bartender and a different bar guest were doing what appeared to be comparing ring tones for about 15-20 minutes.  All the while, she was not observed looking around to check the status of other guests. 

Throughout the evaluation the bartender poured a minimum of a 4 count = 1.5 ounces to a 6 count = 2 ounce.  On one occasion the bartender was pouring a second round of caramel colored liquor on the rocks in 4ounce rocks glasses.  The bottle of liquor was nearly empty, but instead of saving the last shot for the next order and having a backup bottle ready, the bartender divided the remainder up between the 2 drinks that were already a 5 count pour. delivering more alcohol than what is prescribed by management is a form of bartender theft.

Each time the bartender served a guest who was paying cash, she would move immediately to the register with one exception.  The exception was an occasion when she prepared drinks for 2 different groups of guests and took payment for one of the groups, became distracted for about 3 minutes and then took the payment for the other drinks; however, there were guests at the bar who had a credit card tab running and on several occasions the bartender did not move to her pad of paper to account for the items served for between 3 and 15 minutes.  Agent has no way to know if each of the items were accounted for. because this was not observed being rung in correctly, agent scores this a possible bartender theft occurrence.

The bartender did wiggle her rear end while pouring draft beer, but was also observed waiting for a guest to finish drinking their beer so she could use the same glass which agent found quite lazy of her.  The guest was clearly annoyed by being pressured to finish the beer in the glass.

Throughout the evaluation the bartender was very lackadaisical about keeping the bar top clean.  Agent observed a guest leave and his glass stayed on the bar for over 2 hours after he was gone.  Three bar guests did a shot and the glasses were still on the bar when agent left an hour later.  Guests at a high top table did a round of shots and then ordered new shots.  When she delivered them, she did not clear the initial empty shot glasses.  In general, the only thing that the bartender would clear was empty beer bottles, but even they would be left for varying amounts of time.

The bartender was not playing pool or darts, but did play Wii bowling with a bar guest on the large television mounted on the south wall of the outside of the ladies room.

During the evaluation agent observed the bartender pour a blue liquid from a storm pourer into a 4 ounce rocks glass about 2/3 full.  She then used a straw to drink the entire contents of the glass.  She took the bottle to a group of guests along with 3 shot glasses and after some exchange, poured the same liquid in the 1 ounce shot glasses.  At this time agent became certain, but cannot substantiate, that the liquid was an alcoholic beverage.  The bartender drinking the shot while on duty, particularly the quantity that she did, was a severe ADLLC violation and can subject licensee holder to hefty fines.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Using the "NO SALE" button to effectively embezzle money as Bartender Theft.

The article below an example how bartenders will use the "no sale" key to mask bartender theft issues. The embezzlement takes place when the bartender accepts cash goes to the register or terminal and presses "no sale" to open the drawer and make it appear they are going to the register to appease anyone watching and/or cameras. From here the stealing occurs by them putting the money in their pocket or tip jar AND/OR they may store the stolen money in the register itself to take out at a later time. Watch for any abacus system they may be using to track the stolen embezzled money in the register (pennies/nickels/dimes in the drawer, colored M&M's, straws, toothpicks, cell phones etc). Many times they will use the ruse of changing out one dollar bills from the tip jar placing two $40 in one's in the register and taking out a $100 in $20's and making it appear legitimate when in actuality they have in fact effectively laundered the stolen money. An additional counter to this is to perform frequent random drawer pulls mid-shift to discover if they are gregariously over in the drawer and match against the "no sale" frequency. On that note, we also recommend not letting them "Z" a register and using a blind bank drop instead (e-mail our office for a form and further information info@eyespyspotter.com). Lastly, if at all possible, disable the "no sale" button completely. If they need to make change for say pool tables or something of that nature, have a separate bank in say a zipper money bag with $50 in quarters for them to exchange. Anybody who complains about this should send up a red flag for you.

 Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)

'Clam' Bartender Arrested for Theft

By Tracy Proulx

The owner of The Drunken Clam bar on Greenville Avenue reported a bartender for pocketing the money he'd collected from customers. Johnston Police charged Adam W. Cesario, 26, of 8 Greenville Ave., Johnston, with two felony counts of embezzlement of more than $100 on Apr. 8 after the owner of The Drunken Clam bar, located downstairs in the same building, alleged that Cesario had pocketed the money paid by customers on two separate nights.

Thomas Paolantonio, owner of The Drunken Clam, called local officers on Apr. 8 and requested that they impose a no-trespass order on Cesario for the bar. When the officers arrived, Ptlm. Joseph McGinn reported, Paolantonio told them that he had fired Cesario after reviewing sales receipts from Apr. 4 and 5 and discovering a $400 difference in reported sales and the actual money collected.According to the police report, Paolantonio also explained that he reviewed the surveillance tapes and saw Cesario serving drinks, then pressing the “no sale” button on the cash register.

Paolantonio also told the officers that Cesario took the money from the customers, but placed the money into his pants pocket or the tip jar. When Paolantonio confronted Cesario with the information, he told McGinn, Cesario admitted he pocketed the money and agreed to pay Paolantonio back. Cesario estimated the amount owed to The Drunken Clam was about $300, and described his actions as “wrong” and stemming from “immature frustration,” according to McGinn's report.

Officers arrested Cesario with two counts of embezzlement, one each for Apr. 4 and 5, and presented him for arraignment at police headquarters, where he was released on $5,000 personal recognizance until a scheduled June 8 court hearing.

BARTENDER BAR THEFT:

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

Bartender Summary                                                                          

• Bartender:  Caucasian female with very short auburn hair wearing a colorful bikini with black legwarmers and black platform shoes.

Agent took a seat at the bar and was greeted within seconds.  The bartender approached with a smile and a cardboard coaster in hand and asked what I would like to drink.  Agent stalled in an attempt to get an offer on the specials if any, but to no avail.  Agent did hear the bartender knowledgably list the numerous specials later in the evaluation after being asked. 

For best customer service, agent feels that bartenders should automatically offer specials particularly when the guest is unsure of what they would like.  At no time did the bartender ask agent if it was their 1st time at the establishment, nor was she overheard asking anyone else.

Agent noted that the bartender had her beer key shoved in the side of her bikini bottom directly against her skin which is an AZ Health Code violation.  Agent suggests strategically placing bottle openers behind the bar if they aren’t already.

When agent’s drink was about 90% empty the bartender approached and offered something new.  Throughout the evaluation the bartender was good about offering new drinks before the guest was completely empty which is an excellent practice.  Eye Spy suggests following the 75% rule which is to always offer a new beverage to guests when it is 75% empty because it helps prevent guests sitting with empty drinks if the establishment is very busy or the staff has a distraction.

During the evaluation agent observed the bartender eating at the north end of the bar standing behind it.  There was a guest eating the food, which appeared to be from Streets of New York, with her as well. 

The bartender was observed standing behind the bar doing what appeared to be texting and also holding her phone while speaking with a bar guest.  On one occasion the bartender and a different bar guest were doing what appeared to be comparing ring tones for about 15-20 minutes.  All the while, she was not observed looking around to check the status of other guests. 

Throughout the evaluation the bartender poured a minimum of a 4 count = 1.5 ounces to a 6 count = 2 ounce.  On one occasion the bartender was pouring a second round of caramel colored liquor on the rocks in 4ounce rocks glasses.  The bottle of liquor was nearly empty, but instead of saving the last shot for the next order and having a backup bottle ready, the bartender divided the remainder up between the 2 drinks that were already a 5 count pour. delivering more alcohol than what is prescribed by management is a form of bartender theft.

Each time the bartender served a guest who was paying cash, she would move immediately to the register with one exception.  The exception was an occasion when she prepared drinks for 2 different groups of guests and took payment for one of the groups, became distracted for about 3 minutes and then took the payment for the other drinks; however, there were guests at the bar who had a credit card tab running and on several occasions the bartender did not move to her pad of paper to account for the items served for between 3 and 15 minutes.  Agent has no way to know if each of the items were accounted for. because this was not observed being rung in correctly, agent scores this a possible bartender theft occurrence.

The bartenderxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx while pouring draft beer, but was also observed waiting for a guest to finish drinking their beer so she could use the same glass which agent found quite lazy of her.  The guest was clearly annoyed by being pressured to finish the beer in the glass.

Throughout the evaluation the bartender was very lackadaisical about keeping the bar top clean.  Agent observed a guest leave and his glass stayed on the bar for over 2 hours after he was gone.  Three bar guests did a shot and the glasses were still on the bar when agent left an hour later.  Guests at a high top table did a round of shots and then ordered new shots.  When she delivered them, she did not clear the initial empty shot glasses.  In general, the only thing that the bartender would clear was empty beer bottles, but even they would be left for varying amounts of time.

The bartender was not playing pool or darts, but did play Wii bowling with a bar guest on the large television mounted on the south wall of the outside of the ladies room.

During the evaluation agent observed the bartender pour a blue liquid from a storm pourer into a 4 ounce rocks glass about 2/3 full.  She then used a straw to drink the entire contents of the glass.  She took the bottle to a group of guests along with 3 shot glasses and after some exchange, poured the same liquid in the 1 ounce shot glasses.  At this time agent became certain, but cannot substantiate, that the liquid was an alcoholic beverage.  The bartender drinking the shot while on duty, particularly the quantity that she did, was a an ADLLC violation and can subject licensee holder to hefty fines.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.

BARTENDER THEFT:

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

• Bartender 1:  Caucasian female approximately 5’4” with xxxxxxxxx brown hair and xxxx xxx tattoos on her zzz wearing a red tank top, short jean shorts and xxxxxxxxx.
• Bartender 2:  Caucasian female approximately 5’7” with brown hair and a xxxx piercing near xxxxx wearing a white midriff baring tank top, short jean shorts and a xxxxxxxxxxx.  She was overheard being called Xxxxx.

The Agent and Associate took a seat at the bar and weren’t greeted until three minutes later which was unreasonable in the Agent’s opinion to due to the lull in business at the time we sat at the bar.  Bartender 1 approached and asked if we had been helped.  We stated we had not.  She placed beverage napkins in front of us and asked what we wanted to drink.  A drink order was placed (see food and beverage summary for details).  She returned with the drinks quickly and asked if we wanted to start a tab.  The Agent provided a card to secure the tab and it was placed behind the bar in an xxxxxxxxxxx which made the Agent feel that the card would be secure and not easily misplaced. 

Bartender 1 cleared a xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx from in front of us but did not wipe the bar top down which left peanut shell remnants from the previous patron scattered along the bar top where we were now trying to enjoy our beverages which was unsightly and unpleasant in the Agent’s opinion.

The Associate’s beverage was empty for six minutes before being offered a new one by Bartender 2.  She made the drink quickly and added it to our tab (see food and beverage summary for details).  Later in the evaluation another round was placed with Bartender 1.  The drinks were made quickly and the Agent requested the tab be closed (see food and beverage summary for details).  She ran the card for payment and delivered the receipt quickly.  No itemized receipt was present.  She thanked us with a slight smile.

Overall, the Agent feels the bartenders were pleasant but not very friendly.  Neither bartender introduced herself by name in case we needed anything.  Also, they seemed to only personally converse with regulars and patrons they already knew which is ineffective towards building new clientele for the establishment in the Agent’s opinion.  Both bartenders lacked in attentiveness in the Agent’s opinion.  Guests would often have to request a new beverage as opposed to the staff offering new beverages when levels were low.  Also, glassware remained on the bar for significant amounts of time after guests were finished before it was eventually cleared.

Both girls were observed on their cell phones during the evaluation.  They kept them near the terminal and were texting and checking them often. 

The Agent witnessed several possible theft and integrity issues with both bartenders during the evaluation.

At 4:53 PM Bartender 2 served a guest a bottle of beer and did not report to the POS.  This guest will be referred to as guest A as he will be mentioned again regarding staff not ringing in drinks.

At 5:00 PM a guest approached the bar top and stated they were not satisfied with their Bloody Mary.  Bartender 1 made her a new cocktail and did not report to the POS to account for the new beverage or place the unwanted beverage on a spill or comp tab.

At 5:01 PM Bartender 1 served two guests who had already closed out two shots of Rumplemintz.  When they got ready to leave, they asked what they owed her for the shots and she stated they were good.  Also, these shot glasses remained in the bar top for 15 minutes before being cleared which is excessive in the Agent’s opinion.

At 5:12 PM Bartender 2 made a shot for a guest on the patio side of the bar and did not report to the POS.

At 5:16 PM Bartender 2 served one patron two pints of beer and two bottles of beer which is a violation of the liquor law as one person cannot be served more than 32 ounces of beer at one time.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

23. For an on-sale retailer or employee to conduct drinking contests, to sell or deliver to a person an unlimited number of spirituous liquor beverages during any set period of time for a fixed price, to deliver more than thirty-two ounces of beer, one liter of wine or four ounces of distilled spirits in any spirituous liquor drink to one person at one time for that person's consumption or to advertise any practice prohibited by this paragraph.

At 5:17 PM Bartender 2 served guest A a bottle of beer and did not report to the POS.

At 5:21 PM Bartender 2 was observed pouring a six count of Crown Royal into a Styrofoam cup for a guest, She did not collect money for the beverage which is a bar theft occurrence. The guest then left the premise with the alcohol drink in hand, which is a violation of the AZ liquor Law.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

31. For a licensee or employee to knowingly permit spirituous liquor to be removed from the licensed premises, except in the original unbroken package. This paragraph shall not apply to a person who removes a bottle of wine which has been partially consumed in conjunction with a purchased meal from the licensed premises if the cork is reinserted flush with the top of the bottle.

Providing alcohol for customers to leave the premise with is a dram shop liquor liability issue that should be addressed by management immediately.

At 5:22 PM the door greeter asked Bartender 2 to pour three shots of Jack for guests he seemed to know personally.  She served the guests the shots and they gave her a ten dollar bill which went into the tip jar.  She blew them kisses as they left.  No move was made to the POS to account for the drinks on a comp tab.

At 5:34 PM Bartender 2 served guest A a bottle of beer and did not report to the POS.

At 5:39 PM the door greeter had brought in a check presenter from outside.  Bartender 1 and Bartender 2 were discussing the tip and the Agent overheard the received a $20 tip on a $6 dollar tab which is suspicious in the Agent’s opinion.  Then, Bartender 2 was overheard stating, “Great, we’re going to get shit for this one.”

At 5:45 PM Bartender 1 poured a seven count Jack Daniels into a Styrofoam cup and gave the cup to a female guest that was on the patio.  She did not report to the POS. Customer left premise with the beverage shortly afterwards.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

31. For a licensee or employee to knowingly permit spirituous liquor to be removed from the licensed premises, except in the original unbroken package. This paragraph shall not apply to a person who removes a bottle of wine which has been partially consumed in conjunction with a purchased meal from the licensed premises if the cork is reinserted flush with the top of the bottle

At 5:56 PM Bartender 1 served a vodka cranberry to a female companion of guest A and did not report to the POS.

At 6:02 PM a Hispanic female in a Xxxxx Xxxxx shirt came behind the bar.  The Agent did not have a view of what she was doing but left the from behind the bar with a Styrofoam cup.  She was observed giving a “lock it up and throw away the key” gesture to Bartender 2.  The instance seemed suspicious.  Also, the Agent recommends only on duty bartenders and barbacks be allowed to come behind the bar.

At 6:06 PM Bartender 2 made the same Hispanic female three shots and did not report to the POS.

Both girls were using the center terminal at the north end of the bar which the Agent had an unobstructed view of.  The Agent is unsure if any of the aforementioned drinks were eventually accounted for on guest or comp tabs.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2012