BAR THEFT.com
How Bartenders Steal & How We Catch Them
Home

BARTENDER THEFT:Free Drinks, Stolen money into tip jar, Service to Minors

March 11, 2014 23:22 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:Free Drinks, Stolen money into tip jar, Service to Minors


Bartender Summary                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

  • BAR 1/XXXXX – Caucasian male with short, dark hair. Tattoos on forearms. Observed wearing a yellow ASU t-shirt and grey pants. Overheard saying to a guest his name was XXXXX.

  • BAR 2 – Caucasian male with black hair and a patch of red hair on the top. Observed wearing a black work t-shirt over a grey long sleeve shirt.

Upon sitting down we were quickly approached and greeted by BAR 1/XXXXX. He took our drink order and then made it at a 4 pour count (~1.5 ounces). He placed the drinks in front of us and secured our tab with a credit card (See Food & Beverage Summary for details).

No napkins were given and it appeared that the majority of patrons sitting at the bar did not have napkins either.

XXXXX and BAR 2 appeared to be working together throughout the evening to take care of any and all of the guests at the bar. They seemed to be sociable with one another and worked well as a team.

XXXXX and BAR 2 were on several occasions observed cleaning the bar; mopping the floor and wiping down the bar top. The Agent found this to be an excellent display with respect to maintaining a clean atmosphere and work environment.

XXXXX was observed pouring numerous liquor based drinks for guests. During these observations he was consistent in his pour (4 count ~ 1.5 ounces), not a 3 count pour (~1.25 ounces). XXXXX appeared to be very knowledgeable about drink mixes, as several different/atypical drinks were ordered by various guests throughout the evaluation.

Upon closing out our tab, XXXXX presented the Agent’s credit card and two credit card slips on the bar top with a pen. No itemized check was given.

Upon our departure XXXXX was observed to wish us a friendly/polite good night.

Several questionable instances were observed while sitting at the bar:

At approximately 11:38 PM, XXXXX had appeared to have lost a guests credit card and spent several minutes looking for it. Upon finding it, XXXXX gave this guest, his two friends, and two other guests a round of shots that he said were on him for the inconvenience of waiting. XXXXX prepared and served these shots but never made a move towards the computer screen to ring these in. Agent scores this as a theft occurrence as he did not record these drinks. This is also an ADLLC Violation as employees are not allowed do give away alcohol. Only owner/managers  or on a managers command.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-242. Sale of liquor on credit prohibited; exceptions

It is unlawful for a licensee, or an employee or agent of a licensee, to sell or offer to sell, directly or indirectly, or to sanction the sale on credit of spirituous liquor, or to give, lend or advance money or anything of value for the purpose of purchasing or bartering for spirituous liquor, except that sales of spirituous liquor consumed on the licensed premises may be included on bills rendered to registered guests in hotels and motels, and spirituous liquor sales for on or off premises consumption may be made with credit cards approved by the director, and sales of spirituous liquor consumed on the premises of private clubs may be included on bills rendered to bona fide members.

At approximately 11:49 PM, XXXXX was observed preparing three vodka and energy drinks (energy drinks being the assumption as it came from the soda gun and not a can and was gold in color). XXXXX prepared these drinks at an over pour of about a 5/6 count pour and made them in clear plastic Solo cups. Upon serving these girls their drinks they went out the front door and were no longer observed. The Agent was unable to determine if they had departed from the establishment or gone to some area of the patio where they could not be observed. These three girls were not seen again in the establishment throughout the remainder of the evaluation.

At approximately 11:54 PM, XXXXX was observed checking his cell phone, which was placed near his computer terminal. Cell phones should not be observed by the guests, XXXXX should have gone somewhere in the back of the establishment to use his phone. Moreover, cell phones are the new abacus system in which bartenders track stolen money. Agent isn't inferring this, just bringing it to management attention.

At approximately 11:57 PM, BAR 2 was observed to give two guests a round of Three Olives Cola shots. They had asked for a taste, but received almost two full shot glasses of this liquor. BAR 2 did not make a move towards either computer screen to ring these drinks up under a comp sheet.

At approximately 12:03 AM, a group of individuals who appeared to be in their late teens early 20’s were observed to sit down at the bar. XXXXX appeared to know at least one or two of them based on their greeting exchange. He did not appear to know all of them as they were observed to be introduced to him at this time. Although the true age of these individuals was unknown, no attempts at identifying their ages had been observed. The Agent would have without a doubt carded these individuals as they looked extremely young, and this bar is in close proximity to a college campus.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-241. Selling or giving liquor to underage person; illegally obtaining liquor by underage person; violation; classification

A. A licensee, an employee or any other person who questions or has reason to question whether or not a person ordering, purchasing, attempting to purchase or otherwise procuring or attempting to procure the serving or delivery of spirituous liquor is under the legal drinking age shall require the person to exhibit a written instrument of identification and may require the person on a card to be retained by the licensee to sign the person's name, the date, and the number of such identification. An off-sale retail licensee or employee of an off-sale retail licensee shall require an instrument of identification from any customer who appears to be under twenty-seven years of age and who is using a drive-through or other physical feature of the licensed premises that allows a customer to purchase spirituous liquor without leaving the customer's vehicle. The following written instruments are the only acceptable types of identification:

At approximately 12:06 AM, XXXXX was observed pouring two Jack and Cokes for a guest. XXXXX took the money for these drinks but then without ringing anything in, placed the money he received for these drinks on top of the cash register, not in the drawer. The money did not go into any tip jar and the Agent did not understand why the money would not then go into the cash drawer. The money remained singled out, sitting on top of the cash register for 15 minutes and then was opbserved to be dropped into the tip jar.

At approximately 12:08 AM, XXXXX was observed to make four shots of a deep blue colored liquor (presumably Blue Curacao). He then poured a little from each of them to make a fifth. These five drinks were served to a group of people playing beer pong next to the bar. No move was made towards the computer to ring these drinks up.

At approximately 12:09 AM, XXXXX was observed to pour a drink of well tequila and a yellow liquid (presumably a sour mix or a citrus mix). The drink was given to a female customer. No move was made towards the computer to ring these drinks up.

At approximately 12:11 AM, XXXXX was observed to pour two draft beers for a guest described as a Caucasian male with a red and black flannel print shirt. XXXXX then poured a third draft beer for this individual who then relocated to resume playing beer pong. No move was made towards the computer to ring these drinks up.

 

Food and Beverage Summary                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Upon our arrival there was no one standing at the downstairs podium to this establishment. However, upon reaching the top of the escalator SERVER 1/XXXXX was observed standing waiting for customers. She greeted us very warmly and walked with us inside. As we walked she rattled off some of the features that were offered that evening, namely beer pong. Furthermore she talked briefly about the menu, stating that this establishment had good food especially the Chicken Parmesan Sliders. There was another female server, however it had appeared she was cut for the evening and about to leave.

XXXXX sat us in the main dining room area and asked us what we wanted to drink. Several items had been attempted to be ordered but the establishment was out of them, initially the Sonoran White Chocolate Ale which the Agent tried to order. XXXXX knew they were out of this and was very polite. A Four Peaks Kiltlifter was instead ordered by the Agent and delivered to the table as a 20 ounce beer, no size was specified when placing the order. The Associate tried to order a Guinness draft, which  they were out of, then tried to order a Newcastle, which they were also out of. BAR 1/XXXXX came over and sat down at our table and had a better idea of what this establishment had or didn’t have and a Blue Moon Winter Ale was suggested and then ordered, which also came to the table in a 20 ounce glass. Both drinks were served in clean, chip free glassware, both were chilled to the right temperature.

At approximately 10:23 PM, the food items were ordered; initially a New York Style Pretzel was placed, but politely shot down by XXXXX as they were out of this item as well. Wisconsin White Cheese Curds were then suggested and then ordered. The Chicken Parmesan sliders and the Buffalo Chicken wrap were ordered as entrees at the same time the appetizer was placed. The Agent, at the time, found that XXXXX did not write down any of the items ordered but repeated them back to us and clarified sides being ordered.

At 10:31 PM, the Cheese curds arrived, they were served with a side of Ancho Chili Ranch Dressing that complemented the perfectly fried cheese curds. Overall this item was very tasty, appropriately priced as well as portioned, and a good start to a meal.

At 10:47 PM, XXXXX stopped by to check on us and grabbed our finished appetizer plate.

At 10:50 PM, XXXXX delivered the entrees to the table. The Chicken Parmesan Sliders were aesthetically displayed on the platter in between a modest portion of sweet potato fries. They were presumably finished in the oven or Salamander as the cheese on top was nicely melted into the marinara sauce. The sweet potato fries were cooked to a golden brown and were an excellent accompaniment to the small sandwiches. The Associates Buffalo Chicken Wrap was ordered with coleslaw, however fries were delivered on the plate. XXXXX was quickly made aware of this, apologized, and returned from the kitchen with coleslaw but also left he fries on the table incase we wanted them. It is presumed that XXXXX had this item comped as neither the fries nor the coleslaw were itemized on the bill. According to the Associate the Buffalo Chicken Wrap and coleslaw were both delicious. Our beer glasses were near empty and another round of drinks were offered and ordered at this time.

At 10:57 PM, XXXXX dropped our 2nd round of beers; 1 Kiltlifter and 1 Blue Moon Winter Ale. Both drinks were served in clean, chip free glassware, both were chilled to the right temperature. The restaurant appeared to mostly clear by this time, and XXXXX had asked us if it would be ok if she played a quick round of beer pong with other guests, which we were ok with. It appeared as though all of her side work was done and no guests were in need of her services. Furthermore, the Agent felt this was a nice gesture to not only us by asking, but that she went above her expected work duties to engage other patrons in playing this game. While XXXXX was playing this game she was not observed to consume any alcoholic beverages, although she was playing with guests who were drinking.

At 11:16 PM, we had finished with our plates of food. Empty plates and glassware were cleared and XXXXX was observed to ask us if we wanted/needed anything else. We said no to anything else and she quickly returned with a correctly itemized bill. The bill was closed out shortly after the Agent placed a credit card in the check presenter.

At 11:33 PM, Upon departure from the table XXXXX was observed to thank us at this time for coming in. As we walked out the front door she also said goodbye.

The Agent and Associate stood outside for a minute or two before returning inside to now sit at the bar. This gesture was done to not raise suspicion of our evaluation purposes in an establishment with such an open floor plan.

At 11:35 PM, we sat down at the bar. Within moments, XXXXX was observed to greet us and take our drink order. A Jack and Coke and a vodka tonic were ordered. XXXXX did not ask for preference, but made both of these drinks in tall glasses. A 4 count pour (~1.5 ounces) of liquor was observed as he made both of these drinks. He quoted the well vodka at $2 and the Jack Daniels at $4. When the bill later arrived this quote was accurate with what we paid.

For discretionary reasons in the Bartender Summary to this report, this section stated that at 11:38 PM, two guests were given Kamikaze shots. The Agent and Associate were these two guests.

For discretionary reasons in the Bartender Summary to this report, this section stated that at 11:57 PM, two guests were each given a Three Olives Cola shot by BAR 2. The Agent and Associate were these two guests.

At 12:17 AM, We departed from the establishment. Upon our departure XXXXX wished us a polite good night.

Of note: Three beers and one food item were selected that were out of stock. It is understandable that after St. Patty’s Day and during ASU’s spring break that items that would normally be stocked would be depleted or absent. Aside from these mitigating circumstances, four randomly selected items is a bit excessive and compromises the Agent’s belief that should they ever return to this establishment or tell friends to go here that things won’t be missing from the food and drink menus again.

 

Michael Zenner - CEO      

Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.

eyespyspotter.com

bartheft.com  (blog)

liquorassessment.com

PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299

Office: 480-777-1919

Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2014


Bartender Theft, Liquor Liabilty Issues, Dram Shop Issues

March 2, 2014 19:26 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT: Strip Club Cabaret, Bar Theft, Liquor Law Violations, Intoxicated Employees

 

Facility Summary   

                                                                                                    

When the agent and associate approached the facility from Xxxxx, the agent and associate wondered for a moment if the facility was even open.  The front doors were closed, there were no items in the front area of the facility to imply it was open, such as a space heater or sign, and although there were few cars in the front and back the facility, overall, it appeared empty and quite.


Through the front doors of the establishment, the host area was dark and vacant as well.  The small desk area had a basket of mints.  To the left of the host desk, a doorway opened up to the main room.


A bar ran along the front left corner of the establishment.  Several stools lined the outside of the bar allowing for patron seating.  There were two POS monitors on either side of the bar, the right of which was being used during the evaluation.  The back area of the bar was messy and full of personal items (Please see Bartender Summary for details).

Along the left wall was an ATM machine, and the restrooms were located in the back left corner of the facility.  No restroom attendant occupied either restroom; however, both restrooms were clean, neat, and fully stocked with paper products and soap.


The DJ booth was located in the left back corner of the facility as well, with a cut-out window at the top of the booth to allow the DJ to look out to the stage and crowd.  Throughout the evaluation, the DJ played a variety of upbeat rock, R&B, and pop music.  The music was played at a comfortable and appropriate level.


The DJ himself was barely audible, however.  His statements sounded very garbled and unintelligible based on the fluctuations in pitch in his “DJ voice” and lack of volume of the microphone.  In addition, a serious integrity issue was observed that was performed by the DJ (Please see Bartender Summary for details).


To the right of the DJ booth and extending from the right back corner of the room was a large VIP area that was separated by large, red, sheer drapes hanging from the ceiling.  In addition, a small VIP area was located in the front right corner of the facility with the same red, sheer drapes creating the walls of the room.  In between the two VIP areas and along the right wall was a line of lap dance chairs facing the crowd.  Behind the chairs was a chair-to-ceiling mirror.


In the center of the room toward the back half of the room was a large rectangular stage with a spinning pole in the center.  The stage was raised on a high platform.  Along the sides of the stage were rectangular VIP tables with “reserved” tents and long bottle service menus standing upright.


A small, circular second stage was located in the front of the room toward the bar.  This stage was low to the ground and surrounded by a padded circular shelf with cup holders built into the base.  This stage was not used during the evaluation.


In between the front of the main stage and the second stage, several small tables were available for additional seating.  Each table had three chairs pushed in and facing the stage.


Overall the facility was relatively well maintained and appeared to have been barely touched after the clean up and organization from the night before.  Based on the exterior appearance of the facility, however, there was nothing welcoming about the facility nor anything that the agent felt would entice passing vehicles to stop by.

 

 

 

Bartender Summary       

                                                                                            

·       Bartender 1: Receipt read “Xxxxx”; Caucasian female, approximately 5’5” tall, thin build, with long brown hair, wearing a dark grey “Xxxxx’s” t-shirt, black leggings, and black sneakers.


The agent and associate walked into the bar and stood waiting for their eyes to adjust.  The agent and associate were approached by Bartender 1, who had come out from behind the bar, and told the agent and associate they could sit wherever they pleased and she would come to them to serve them.  The agent and associate took a seat at one of the tables and Bartender 1 walked over to the agent and associate.


Bartender 1 asked us what we would like to drink, and the agent and associate placed drink orders (Please see Food and Beverage Summary for details).  Bartender 1 repeated the order for confirmation and left to pour and retrieve the beverages.


Bartender 1 returned, placing the beverages in front of the agent and associate without beverage napkins.  Bartender 1 stated the price of the beverages.  The agent provided a credit card, and Bartender 1 asked if the agent would like to open or close the tab.  The agent stated that they wanted to open a tab and Bartender 1 asked the agent for an ID in order to hold the card.


Bartender 1 did not ID the associate at all, and although Bartender 1 did take the agent’s ID she did not look at it prior to serving the agent and associate liquor. Furthermore, she did not appear to be concerned with the age of the agent at all, but instead took the ID solely to hold the card.  The agent feels that a cash payment would have prevented Bartender 1 from viewing the agent’s ID entirely.  Neither the agent nor the associate were over 35 and, therefore, should have been ID’d.


Bartender 1 took the card and ID and walked away.  At no point during the evaluation did Bartender 1 formally introduce herself or give the agent and associate her name.

While seated at the table, the agent noted that Bartender 1 decided to sit on the outside of the bar, next to a customer with whom she had been and would be flirting throughout the evaluation.  This patron was a tall African American man with dread locks and a beard, wearing a long-sleeved shirt, sweat pants, and flip flops with socks.  The bartender took a position on the opposite side of the bar at 4:30pm and she returned to this position periodically throughout the evaluation.


Later in the evaluation, the agent and associate approached the bar to order an additional beverage (Please see Food and Beverage summary for details).  Bartender 1 immediately asked if the agent wanted to close the tab.  The agent was surprised, feeling that a more appropriate promotional response would be to ask if the agent wanted another beverage instead of bringing attention to the idea of leaving the establishment.  Instead, an additional beverage was ordered.


Although Bartender 1 quickly provided the associate the beverage, Bartender 1 neglected to place this beverage on the tab and, therefore, the beverage was never paid for.  The agent is sure this was not an unspoken comp’d beverage but, instead, an error of neglect on Bartender 1’s part.

This beverage was served with a beverage napkin.


The agent noted that the back bar area was covered with Bartender 1’s personal bags and possibly some of the DJ’s items.  The agent noted a purse by the register, a large over-sized bag in the center of the back bar area, and a laptop computer bag next to the large bag.

The agent also observed several integrity issues:


At 4:54pm while Bartender 1 was sitting at the bar next to the customer with whom she was flirting, the DJ walked behind the bar and poured three mixed shots, distributing one to Bartender 1, one to the patron with whom she was sitting, and keeping one for himself.  The patron, the DJ, and Bartender 1 took the shots.  None of the beverages were paid for or accounted for on a comp tab.  The agent noted that the DJ and Bartender 1 behaved as if this was common practice. ths is also an ADLLC Violation.


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.

At 5:15pm Bartender 1 served herself and the patron with whom she was flirting two large shots of straight Peach Ciroc.  Neither of these shots was paid for nor accounted for on a comp tab.

Bartender 1 was noted to almost immediately pick up her cell phone and text as soon as the patron with whom she was flirting walked away to use the restroom or make a call outside.

While talking to the patron with whom she was flirting, Bartender 1 complained several times that she was “so bored”.

Bartender 1 and the patron were also overheard several times making fun of Xxxxx, making statements such as “crack kills” and “gotta love heroin”.  The agent feels that not only should staff never make fun of other staff as it portrays a negative impression of the establishment, but, more importantly, if Bartender 1 was obviously aware of Xxxxx’s state of intoxication, it is Bartender 1’s responsibility to cut her off and ensure she leaves the property within the allotted and legally required amount of time.

 

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, "obviously intoxicated" means inebriated to the extent that a person's physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.

 

Overall, the agent felt that Bartender 1 completely neglected almost all aspects of her job and its responsibilities.  As a regular patron, the agent would hope that Bartender 1 was not working if the agent ever decided to return.

 

 

Dancer Summary

 

Dancer 1: Possibly Named Xxxxx; African American female, approximately 5’6” tall, thin build, with black hair worn up in a side bun, wearing a black bra, a green lace thong, and black boots.

Dancer 2: Caucasian female, approximately 5’5” tall, medium build, with long brown hair, wearing a matching green and black thong and bra, and black heels.

Dancer 3: Named Xxxxx; Caucasian female, approximately 5’7” tall, thin build, with blonde hair worn up in xxxxxxxxxx  up-do, wearing a black bra, black ruffled underwear, black thigh highs, and clear heels.

Dancer 4: Caucasian female, approximately 5’4” tall, medium build, with blonde hair, wearing a white thong white bra, white heels, and a knee brace.

Throughout the evaluation there were only four dancers working; however, at no point during the evaluation were all four dancers out on the floor at the same time.  Although there were few dancers on shift to begin with, only having two or three out on the floor at a time caused the establishment to be even less appealing.

Overall the dancers were not very friendly or welcoming.

Dancer 2 was observed either off of the floor in the back area or sitting by herself against the right wall in a lap dance chair, watching TV and pouting.  She was not observed talking to any customers or employees and sat with her arms and legs crossed watching TV.  When she was called onstage to perform her set, she did so with minimal enthusiasm and appeared entirely bored.

Dancer 4 was initially observed talking to customers at the bar when the evaluation began.  She performed an enthusiastic set, doing pole tricks and flirting with the few customers in the establishment.  She did not approach the agent and associate however.

Dancer 1 performed her set enthusiastically as well, doing several pole tricks and dancing around the stage for the few patrons seated at the bar.  Dancer 1 was observed exiting the VIP area in the beginning of the evaluation, having just performed a dance, however was not observed talking to any other patrons thereafter and did not approach the agent and associate.

The only dancer that did approach the agent and associate, as well as every other patron in the establishment, was Dancer 3, Xxxxx.  Dancer 3, however, was clearly intoxicated.  Her movements on stage and her physical appearance, including the appearance of her pupils caused the agent to believe Xxxxx was extremely high and possibly drunk as well.

 

 

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, "obviously intoxicated" means inebriated to the extent that a person's physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.

 

 

When Xxxxx finished her set on stage she was observed approaching the bar and ordered a gin and tonic.  Xxxxx walked from the bar with the freshly poured beverage and came directly to the agent and associate who were seated at a table.  Xxxxx introduced herself and unknowingly spilled her beverage all over the associate’s lap.  Xxxxx was slurring her words terribly and barely stood up straight.  The agent was shocked that she was working in such a condition.

 

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, "obviously intoxicated" means inebriated to the extent that a person's physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.

 

Xxxxx asked the agent and associate if they were interested in a dance, which they declined.  Xxxxx then spent much of the evaluation in the DJ booth with the DJ and in the back room.

 

The agent did not observe the dancers perform any lap dances.

 

In addition, there were periods of ten minutes and longer that no dancer was on stage at all.

 

Overall, the agent and associate were very disappointed with the lack of friendliness of the dancers and the sloppy presentation of Xxxxx.  The agent feels that if this is what most day shifts look like, in regard to how many dancers work and how they behave, it is no surprise the establishment was extremely quiet.

 

 

 

Security Summary

There was no Security working during this evaluation.

 

 

 

Food and Beverage Summary                                                                                 

                                                                                                                                            

Spotter Notes:

 

While seated at the bar, the agent and associate struck up a conversation with Bartender 1 twice.  At this point the agent, associate, and a male African American patron with whom Bartender 1 was flirting were the only three customers in the establishment.

 

The agent feels that part of the customer loss was due to the fact that the dancers did not pay the customers much attention and that Bartender 1 was paying all of her attention to the one customer.

 

When talking to Bartender 1, the third patron was in the bathroom.  As soon as the patron returned, Bartender 1 walked away from the agent and associate, in the middle of the agent asking a question.

 

The second conversation occurred while the third patron was outside on the phone. Again, when the third patron returned, Bartender 1 abruptly stopped talking to the agent and associate and returned to paying all of her attention to the third customer.

During the first conversation, the agent asked about the level of business at that time (which was three customers).  Bartender 1 stated that the nights were busy at the establishment but “the days suck”.

 

Bartender 1 continued to state that that particular day was the busiest day the establishment had had in a long time.  Bartender 1 was referring to the six customers that were in the establishment at the beginning of the evaluation.  As a regular patron, this description would cause the agent to believe the establishment was never upbeat and lively during the day and would choose to go elsewhere during the day.

 

In addition, Bartender 1 stated that Hi Liter has the best strip club day shift.  Bartender 1 spent several minutes stating that it was a great day shift with food and happy hour drink specials.  The agent felt that this was a very inappropriate conversation due to the fact that it was promoting a competing establishment and putting down Xxxxx’s Cabaret.

For the first round of beverages, the agent ordered a Red Bull/vodka, which Bartender 1 did not try to up-sell.  Bartender 1 did, however, pour the beverage with accurate pour counts and provided a beverage that was consistent and accurate in flavor.

For his first and second beverage, the associate ordered Coronas.  Both Coronas were fresh and cold.

 

Reserved VIP Tables:

 

The agent asked Bartender 1 about the reserved tables by the stage.  Each table had a large “Reserved” tent on the table as well as an upright bottle service menu.  Bartender 1 explained that these tables were said to be reserved in case a large party came into the establishment and wanted to order bottle service.  Bartender 1 stated that the “reserved” sign enabled the staff to ask those patrons who did not order bottle service to move.

Bartender 1 stated that these tables did not cost extra due to the cost of the bottle service.

Drink Tickets:

 

Bartender 1 was not able to clearly explain the drink tickets, however, did provide a few for the agent.  Bartender 1 explained that the staff gave away the tickets to the patrons.

 

The patrons were required to pay the $10 cover at the door and then were able to use the drink tickets.  The agent asked several questions but did not get further clarification.

 

The tickets were given to the agent as if they could be used at another date, however, the tickets state that they are to be used the same day they are acquired and each ticket is dated, which would imply they are useless and have already been used.

 

Cab Drivers:

 

Bartender 1 made a comment about the amount of cab drivers that come into the establishment during the day shifts.  Bartender 1 then explained that they come in because all cab drivers are given kickbacks from the gentlemen’s clubs in the area.  Bartender 1 explained that the cab drivers get $5 per patron they bring to the establishment when those patrons do not pay cover.  When those patrons do pay cover, the cab drivers receive the entire $10 cover charge per patron.

 

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: Not ringing in drinks, Liquor Law Violations, auto up-selling

November 28, 2012 20:11 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

·       Bar 1:  Caucasian female approximately 5’4 with short black hair and pink highlights and multiple facial piercings wearing a blue zip up sweater and jeans.

·       Bar 2:  Caucasian male approximately 6’ with short spiked brown hair and multiple tattoos on his arms wearing a cross necklace.

The agent and associate approached the bar top and were greeted with a slight delay by Bar 1.  She was surprisingly staring rather blankly off into space and didn’t seem to notice new guests had approached her bar top (see food and beverage summary for details).  She came over and asked “you didn’t need anything to drink did you?”  The agent was perplexed by her non-upselling greet as it was not inviting or good service in the agent’s opinion.

A drink order was placed (see food and beverage summary for details).  She brought the drinks in a timely manner and placed them on top of coasters.  She reported to the POS to start our tab.

She did not introduce herself by name in case we needed anything further.

Later in the evaluation Bar 2 came onto shift.  He greeted us with a smile and asked if we were doing ok which is good service in the agent’s opinion.  He was only observed for a short time but appeared to be friendly and attentive in the agent’s opinion.

The agent presented payment for Bar 1 to process as it appeared she was getting ready to come off her shift.  Payment was processed quickly.  She did not return it in a check presenter and an itemized receipt was not included.  She thanked us while walking away which impersonal and in genuine in the agent’s opinion.

Overall the agent was not impressed with Bar 1’s service.  She moved around the bar without any sense of urgency which made her appear to be bored, tired and unenthused to be at work which is unpleasant in the agent’s opinion.  She was not observed conversing personally with any guests and only spoke when an order was being exchanged which is impersonal and not a quality that a bartender should posses in the agent’s opinion.

She was only observed pouring one mixed drink and it was poured using a 3 count pour.  She placed the pint glass directly into the ice well when making this drink which is a Health Code violation.  Most of the drinks she served were bottled and draft beer.  Draft beer was served with ¼ inch of head and in a cold glass.  Drinks made for servers were accompanied with a ticket and no server call outs were observed.  

There was one instance where she did not report to the POS after making a beverage for a walk up guest.  At approximately 4:50PM she served a guest she personally knew by name a pint of beer and did not report to the POS.  The agent did not see this drink accounted for on any tab.

Also, at approximately 5:02PM she served a single walk up guest a large pitcher of Blue Moon which is a violation of the liquor law as the pitcher is likely 64 ounces and a single customer can only be served 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.

Food and Beverage Summary

·       Host 1:  Caucasian female approximately 5’6 with reddish hair in a ponytail wearing a pink sweater and jeans.

There was a host on duty upstairs when we arrived at the establishment.  She did not greet us in a friendly manner instead asked “2 of you?” without smiling or welcoming us into the establishment.  It was very unwelcoming. Server 1 was at the host stand and since we were going to be her table, she led us to our table in the dining room.  Host 1 was not seen seating any tables and appeared to have gone off duty shortly after the evaluation began so the section was not scored.

Shortly after we sat down, two guests sat themselves in the dining room at a table nearby.  The agent watched as Server 1 and Bar 1 obviously walked past this table numerous times without greeting them or even noticing they hadn’t been acknowledged by staff members.  The agent observed them looking around as they were desperately trying to get a staff member to come to the table.  Finally, approximately 15-20 minutes after they sat down, the male patron went up to the bar and asked for menus and also asked to have a server sent to the table which is unacceptable in the agent’s opinion.  Server 2 approached shortly after to greet the table.

The agent was disconcerted by the lack of organization displayed by staff.  The agent feels staff need to be diligent about watching the front door and watching for new tables to be sat if a host is not on duty.  Also, the agent feels the slow business level at the time was such that the staff members should’ve been able to notice these new guests immediately.  In fact, the agent was surprised they did not walk out.

At the table the agent ordered an iced tea.  The tea tasted fresh brewed and was served with plenty of ice.  The agent requested sweetener.  The caddie it was delivered in was grimy and only half full.  The associate ordered a Michelob Ultra bottle.  The beer was cold and refreshing.

For an appetizer the chicken strips were ordered.  The breading was flimsy and was falling of the chicken which made a mess on the table.  The chicken was tender however neither the agent nor the associate cared for the flavor of the breading.  BBQ sauce and ranch was requested on the side.  Neither the agent nor the associate cared for the flavor of the BBQ sauce.

The agent ordered the Buffalo Chicken pizza with light chicken.  The agent was brought a pizza with tomatoes and onions on top.  At first the agent wondered if they made the mistake in ordering as neither vegetable is cared for by the agent and they would’ve been requested to be left off the pizza.  The agent then tasted the brown sauce on the pizza and realized it was the same BBQ sauce that had been served with the chicken and not enjoyed.  The agent believed the wrong pizza was brought so called over Server 1.

The agent asked Server 1 if the wing sauce was supposed to taste like BBQ sauce and if the pizza in front of the agent was the Buffalo Chicken pizza.  She stated it was the Buffalo pizza.  The agent stated they didn’t want that pizza and asked for a menu.  The agent then read the menu description of the BBQ pizza to Server 1 and stated that was obviously the pizza that had been delivered.  Server 1 then went to the POS to look at the ticket and realized she had rung in the wrong pizza.  She apologized and stated the correct pizza would be out soon.  She was genuinely apologetic and asked if the agent needed anything while waiting for the pizza which was appreciated by the agent.

The agent feels this mistake should’ve been caught at the window and the pizza should not have been delivered to the agent.  The fact that it was not realized until the menu description was read to her signifies to the agent Server 1 lacks menu knowledge.

 

The Buffalo Chicken pizza was served 19 minutes later and was definitely worth the wait - great stuff.  The cheddar and mozzarella cheese was perfectly melted and abundantly spread over the chicken.  The wing sauce had a great aroma and was spread along the bottom of the ingredients instead of a traditional red sauce.  The chicken was tender and paired well with the rest of the ingredients.  The crust was soft and had a great flavor and consistency.  The side of ranch served on the side was a cool contrast to the zipp of the wing sauce.

The BBQ Pizza was present on the check instead of the Buffalo Pizza.  The agent did not point out the mistake because the price for the two items is equivalent.  However, the agent feels the incorrect item should have been comped off and the correct item should have been accounted for due to inventory purposes.

The associate ordered the create your own pizza with Italian sausage, pepperoni, ham and bacon.  The meat was abundant and well seasoned.  The cheese was perfectly melted and the marinara had a great flavor.

The associate requested a box when the agent’s pizza was delivered and the agent asked for two boxes to be brought.  They were not delivered until 10 minutes later which is a significant delay in the agent’s opinion.

At the bar the agent ordered a Kilt Lifter draft.  The glass the beer was served in was approximately 22 ounces.  Even though the agent did not specify the size that was wanted the agent feels an upsize should be upsold as opposed to up served. Auto-upselling is a form of bartender theft in the Agent's opinion.

The beer was over flowing onto the bar top and the spill was not cleaned up by Bar 1 which is poor guest service.  The beer was delicious and refreshing.  The associate ordered a Michelob Ultra bottle.  The beer was equally cold and refreshing as the beer served at the table.  The agent is unsure if all items were properly charges for as an itemized receipt was not provided.

·       MOD 1:  Caucasian male approximately 6’ with brown hair and slightly balding wearing a sweater and jeans.

The agent is unsure if the MOD was properly identified.  This male was seen sitting at the curved bar top by the kitchen for the majority of the evaluation.  He was seen going behind the DJ booth which signified to the agent he was possibly a supervisor.  The agent feels that of he was the MOD he did a poor job of circulating through the facility.  He remained stationed at the side bar top and was not observed talking to guests.

The agent feels after the food mistake by Server 1 should’ve resulted in a table visit by the manager.


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 not ringing drinks, ADLLC Violations, employee alcohol consumption, free drinks,

April 22, 2012 01:38 by administrator

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 not ringing drinks, ADLLC Violations, Dram Shop Liquor Liability Issues, employee alcohol consumption, free drinksfor friends.

February 2, 2012 16:16 by administrator

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


BARTENDER THEFT - Bartender not ringing drinks, employee alcohol consumption, free drinks, ADLLC Violations, dram shop and liquor liability issues, employee alcohol consumption, security guard alcohol consumption..

December 19, 2011 19:58 by administrator

 

Bartender Summary

  • Bartender 1- XXXXXXX xXXXXXX, in her early thirties, with long xXXXXXX hair and a slim build.  She wore a xxxx xxxx hat, a teal tank top, and jean shorts.  She had visible tattoos on her XXXX and XXXXX XXXXXXXX.
  • Bartender 2- XXXXXXX xXXXXXX, in her late twenties, with short curly xXXXXXX hair and a petite frame.  She wore a xxx cowboy hat, a black tank, black jacket, jean shorts, and knee high xxxx socks.
  • **Off Duty Bartender- XXXXXXX xXXXXXX, in her early thirties, with medium length XXX hair and XXXXXXXXX.  She was approximately 5’5” in height, and wore a black XXXXXXX XXXXX sweat suit.  Possibly a manager, as she had keys to the registers and used them several times.

Agent and Associate took a seat at the bar, and were quickly greeted by Bartender 1.  Bartender 1 did not offer her name at any time.  She placed cocktail napkins on the bar top, and asked for a drink order.  Bartender 1 seemed very knowledgeable of the drink specials offered.  

She was very friendly and personable with all the patrons at the bar, though it seemed easier to get her attention if one was a “regular.”  There were several instances in which Agent and Associate had empty glasses for several minutes before being noticed by a bartender.  Agent recommends employees implement the 75% rule, in which employees offer additional beverages to patrons whose drinks become less than 75% full.  This will prevent customers from being left without a beverage, as well as possibly boosting sales.  

Agent also noted that Bartender 1 used cash from the tip jar to make change for a customer.  Agent recommends employees refrain from handling cash in the tip jars in order to prevent confusion or the mishandling of monies.

When preparing the beverages, Bartender 1 used the designated ice scoop.  Her pour count was inconsistent throughout the evaluation, as it varied from as little as a two count, to as heavy as an eight count.  Agent suggests all employees use a constant 1 ½ ounce pour to maintain consistency and accuracy among all prepared beverages.

She was fairly consistent in entering beverages into the POS after preparation. There were, however, several instances which warrant the managers’ attention:

At 4:26 PM Bartender 1 prepared six shots of honey-colored liquor from a chilled bottle.  She walked five of the shots over to Off Duty Bartender, and left the sixth shot next to the POS system.  At no time did she attempt to enter the shots into the POS system.

At 4:36 PM Bartender 1 acknowledges a male customer with who she is familiar with.  She mixes him a cocktail and places it in front of the man.  He asks what the beverage is, since he did not give a verbal order.  She explains the drink and does not make an attempt to enter the beverage into the POS or collect any money.

At 4:42 Bartender 1 prepared an eight count Vodka and Redbull in a Styrofoam cup that Security 1 had been drinking from.  Agent found this disturbing for several reasons.  This is an excessive pour, as it was in excess of 3 oz of alcohol.  Preparing an alcoholic beverage in a Styrofoam cup can lead to the beverage being removed from the premises, whether on purpose or accident.  Security 1 was still on duty at the time and is an ADLLC violation.  This beverage was also not entered into the POS system which is a bartender theft occurrence.

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.

At approximately 5:15 PM Bartender 1 gave a bottle of Bud Light to a male customer, and did not make an attempt to enter the beer into the POS system.

Bartender 2 seemed preoccupied (mostly with her cell phone), and offered most of her attention to the Off Duty Bartender and her friends.  When preparing her beverages, she did use the designated ice scoop to retrieve drinks from the well.  Her pour count was also inconsistent.  Though most of her beverages were prepared with the accurate four count (1 ½ ounce) pour, there were several instances in which singles were ordered but doubles were prepared.

Agent was also concerned with the placement of Bartender 2’s bottle opener, as she stored it in between her shorts and bare bottom.  This is an AZ Health Code violation, as well as unprofessional.  Agent recommends bottle openers be stored in the pocket or attached to a retractable clip on the pants.

Agent was very concerned with Bartender 2’s inconsistency in entering beverages into the POS.  Several instances in particular stood out, and are listed below.

At 4:16 PM Bartender 2 prepared a Crown Royal cocktail in a Styrofoam cup for a customer.  The customer had already been drinking from this cup, so Agent assumed this was not the first cocktail prepared in the Styrofoam container.  The customer, dressed in all black attire, then walked around on the patio, as well as on the side walk outside of the establishment, with the cup.  This is an AZ Liquor Code violation, as open containers holding alcohol are not permitted to be removed from the premises.  Furthermore, Bartender 2 made no attempt to enter the beverage in the POS system which is a bartender theft occurrence.

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 approximately 4:20 PM Bartender 2 prepared three Vodka Redbull cocktails, and gave them to friends of the Off Duty Bartender.  She did not attempt to enter the cocktails after delivering the drinks.

At 4:25 PM Bartender 2 handed a Bud Light Bottle to a male customer, and did not move to the POS system to enter it.

Around 4:30 PM Bartender 2 prepared three yellow shots (Agent assumed they were White Gummi Bears).  She handed them to a group of customers at the bar. The patrons asked what they were, as if they had not ordered them. After drinking the shots, patrons thanked Bartender 2 and gave her “high-fives.”  Though Bartender 2 eventually migrated to the POS, Agent was unable to confirm if the shots were entered, as other beverages had been prepared and delivered in between that time.

Both Bartenders’ 1 & 2 habitually played on their cell phones in blatant view of customers.  Though Bartender 2 only used her phone while stationed at the POS, Bartender 1 used her cell phone near the POS and in front of customers while conversing with the patrons.  They seemed to be texting and playing on their Facebook sites.  Agent felt this to be extremely unprofessional.

At the end of the evaluation, the check was placed in a clean presenter, though it did have an error.  (Please refer to Beverage Summary for further details.) Bartenders 1 & 2 thanked Agent and Associate and said goodbye.

Agent did not witness either bartender drinking or smoking, though Bartender 2 seemed to be consuming cough drops.

 

Security Summary

  • Security 1- XXXXXXX male, in his mid-thirties, with XXXXX XXX hair, a XXXXX, XXX, and thinly XXXXX XXXX.  He had a large, muscular build, and wore a black staff shirt under a XXXXXXXXt.

Upon approaching the establishment, Agent and Associate were nonchalantly stopped by Security 1 and asked for identification.  He did not use Agent and Associate’s name when observing the identification. Security 1 seemed unfriendly, and did not tell Agent and Associate to enjoy the visit, or anything at all for that matter.

As previously mentioned in Bartender Summary, Agent witnessed Security 1 drinking Vodka Redbull while working.  This is very unprofessional, as well as a safety risk and against the law. This is a dram shop issue that should be addressed by management.  If the security staff is intoxicated, they are unreliable for maintaining safety and upholding liquor laws, not to mention should something terrible happen and it is discovered that security was alcohol impaired, it could lead to a serious dram shop problem.

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.

Security 1 seemed very distracted by the patrons congregating on the patio. Security 1 spent a majority of the evaluation visiting with the customers, and Agent did not note any time in which Security 1 walked through the bar to monitor the situation.  Agent only noted a handful of times in which he actually entered the facility, and that was to get a refill on his cocktail and to check the score of the game.

When Agent and Associate left, Security 1 did not acknowledge the departure.



Beverage Summary

DO NOT POST THIS SECTION TO STAFF

SPOTTER ANONYMITY WILL BE COMPROMISED

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

Lastly, Associate ordered a XXXXXXX from Bartender 1.  The XXXXX was served ice cold and was full-flavored.  This beer, however, was not entered into the POS system after delivery, and was not on the final tab. Giving away alcohol drinks to a trained bar theft spotter, without prompting,  leads that Agent to assume that a serious problem or culture of theft exists at this establishment.

 

Management Summary

  • Off Duty Bartender/Manager- XXXXXXX xXXXXXX, in her early thirties, with xxxxxx and xxxx xxx.  She was approximately xxxx in height, and wore a black XXXXXXX xxxxx sweat suit.  Possibly a manager, as she had keys to the registers and used them several times.

Though it did not appear that there was a manager on duty, there was an off duty employee that Agent surmised to be a manager. Agent was deeply concerned by the woman’s behavior during the evaluation.  Off Duty Bartender/Manager was seated on the xxxend of the bar on the xxxx when Agent arrived.  It was clear that she had already been drinking, as there were several cocktail glasses in front of her, one of which she was drinking from. (A pint glass containing an orange colored cocktail.)

Shortly after Agent arrived, Agent noticed Off Duty Bartender/Manager get up from her bar stool and walk around to the server’s station.  She then bent underneath the bar and started to handle the register.  Agent found this inappropriate, as no cash handling should be done by someone under the influence of alcohol.  Approximately fifteen minutes later, she returned behind the bar and pulled out the cash drawer again.

Around 4:20 PM Agent heard a yell coming from the Off Duty Bartender/Manager’s direction.  Agent witnessed the off duty employee crawl up onto the bar and start smashing glass beer bottles into the trash can.  Agent could not believe the behavior of the off duty employee.  Regardless if the woman was a manager or not, this makes for a very unprofessional appearance.

Off Duty Bartender/Manager remained drinking at the bar the entire evaluation.  Many of the free drinks Agent witnessed bartenders giving away went to Off Duty Bartender/Manager’s party.

Because the manager performed an "Act of Working" in the eyes of the law that would be considered on duty and had this Agent been an ADLLC officer this would have been an ADLLC violation.              

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. 2011


BARTENDER THEFT - Bartender not ringing drinks, intoxicated bartender, employee drug use, liquor violations, heath code violations, smoking law violations.

September 22, 2011 00:31 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

  • Bartender 1 – Caucasian male with xxxxx and xxxxxxxxxx wearing xxxxxxxxxxxxxx shirt and xxxxxx with tattoos on xxxxxx.
  • Bartender 2 – Caucasian male with xxxxxx wearing a xxxxxxxxxx down shirt and xxxxxxxxx with black Dickies hanging down below his butt.

Agent and associate took a seat at the bar and were greeted by bartender 2 within 2 minutes.

He approached and spun napkins onto the bar top and asked what we would like to drink.  He did not offer a specialty drink menu so agent asked for one. 

He did not introduce himself or ask if we would like anything to eat.

Bartender 2 set about making the drinks we ordered right away and returned with them placing them on the cocktail napkins and chatting with us for a moment before moving down the bar to speak to another guest.  Bartender 2 made no move to the POS, did not quote us a price and did not request a credit card for a tab.  There was an issue with one of the drinks. (Please see food and beverage summary for details.)

Later in the evaluation associates drink was completely empty for nearly 5 minutes before bartender 2 approached and asked about another.  While he made the drink he was quite engrossed in a conversation with another bar guest and remained so when he dropped off the drink.  He did not take the empty away and made no move to the POS to record the drink.

Agent observed bartender 2 rolling a beer bottle on top of a cooler behind the bar and when the guest asked why he was doing this, the bartender went into detail about how it breaks up the sediment from the bottom of the bottle, but then when he opened the beer right after rolling it, a large amount of it foamed over onto the top of the cooler.  Agent thought it was a nice touch to roll the guests beer, but felt it was a bit odd that he allowed it to spill on the top of the cooler and neglected to clean it up.

Agent and associate had nearly no dealing with bartender 1 during the evaluation; however agent noted from afar that bartender 1 was quite stone faced.  He did not smile, introduce himself, or offer any pleasant welcoming behavior to any of the guests he was observed dealing with.  He was quite sarcastic which a few of the guests found amusing, but agent felt he could have attempted to be much friendlier.

For quite a while bartender 1 was observed sitting on a foot stool behind the bar doing something in one of the coolers which agent surmised was possibly taking inventory or cleaning.  For another large portion of the evaluation the bartender 1 was gone from behind the bar leaving bartender 2 to handle the bar top on his own which was not too busy for a single bartender at the time.

Agent observed bartender 1 pour Don Julio into a large snifter which he had laying on its side apparently to measure the pour.  Agent estimated that there was 4 – 5 ounces of tequila in the snifter when the pour was complete and agent does not believe that the guest ordered a double; regardless it was more accurately a quadruple. Bartender 1 did move right to the POS after serving the drink.

This is also an ADLLC Violation and a dram shop issue that management should address.

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.

Agent noted that there were no tab chits in front of any guest during the evaluation and no guests were observed paying cash as they went either.

Agent observed bartender 2 pour two 6 count shots of Sambucca into small rocks glasses, hand one to the guest and keep one for himself, toast the guest and drink the alcohol while standing behind the bar.  He then continued talking to the guest and made no move to the POS to record; which is obviously an ADLLC Violation, not to mention a theft occurrence.

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.

Agent observed bartender 1 serve three 4 count pour shots of wild turkey to 3 bar guests while one of the guests appeared to be objecting and afterward, replace the bottle to its shelf, but make no move to the POS.

There were three occasions that agent observed bartender 2 or the server attempting to deliver guests food, but bartender 2 had put the wrong item into the system which is more evidence to agent’s suspicion that the bartender was not sober (see addendum). He incorrectly ordered xxxxx, xxxxxxxxxx and a xxxxxxxx dessert which ended up being offered to and eaten by other guests for free.  Not only was this a profit loss, but it meant the guest that ordered food had to wait even longer for their food to be prepared, and ones that were going to order food didn’t because they got free food.

Bartender 2 was observed serving numerous drinks during the evaluation and there were only 5 times that agent observed him approaching the POS.  When he did approach the POS he did not even look around as if he was attempting to remember what he had served to enter it in all at once.  Agent estimates that bartender 2 served 10-15 drinks that were not accounted for in the POS.

Other than the 3 aforementioned shots of Wild Turkey, the few drinks that agent observed bartender 1 serve appeared to be entered into the POS.

There were occasions during the evaluation that agent noted glassware not being removed from in front of guests when they received new beverages and also the top of the dishwasher and both sides of the service well located at the end of the bar were covered with dirty dishes.  Agent understands that it is important for bartenders to spend time engaging with guests, but it is equally important not to let things become unsightly or unhealthy.

During the evaluation agent observed 3 men smoking cigarettes at the bar and neither of the bartenders appeared to be concerned in the least about the issue at all.  In fact, bartender 2 was observed lighting one of the men’s cigarettes with a match for him.  The men were at the bar for some time and they all had more than one cigarette.  Not only is this a violation of the AZ Smoke Free Act, but it is disrespectful to other guests.  Agent and associate were certainly not asked if we minded and neither were any of the other guests at the bar.  Agent was appalled that the bartenders would allow such behavior and totally disregard the law and the feelings of the other guests in the establishment.

36-601.01. Smoke-free Arizona act

As defined by the law, all violating proprietors are subject to be fined up to $500 for each offense.

B. Smoking is prohibited in all public places and places of employment within the state of Arizona

I. An owner, manager, operator or employee of place regulated by this law shall inform any person who is smoking in violation of this law that smoking is illegal and request that the illegal smoking stop immediately.

K. A person who smokes where smoking is prohibited is guilty of a petty offense with a fine of not less than fifty dollars and not more than three hundred dollars.

When agent and associate were ready to tab out bartender 1 was away from the bar and had been for 15 minutes or so and bartender 2 was chatting with a guest.  It took 10 minutes for agent and associate to get bartender 2 attention to get our tab so we could close out.

Addendum:

Food and Beverage Summary

DO NOT POST THIS SECTION TO STAFF

SPOTTER ANONYMITY WILL BE COMPROMISED

We chose a seat at a booth on the left side of the establishment from the entrance.

The specialty cocktails ordered were:

xxxxxxxxxxx which was served with a lime wedge in a stemmed water glass, tasted good, but the ginger beer was a bit flat.

Old Fashioned which was served in a rocks glass and garnished with a black cherry in the center of an orange twist.  The drink was very good and a bit different than the typical old fashioned, but was a nice twist.

xxxxxxxx was served in a martini glass with grenadine pooled in the bottom.  The drink was fruity and very cold and was quite good.

xxxxxx which was served on the rocks with a lime wedge.  The Daiquiri was quite different than expected which agent believes was from the Maraschino Liquor and the grapefruit juice was clearly not fresh as it almost tasted of aluminum, but overall the cocktail was good.

xxxxxxxxxx which associate was excited to find that the establishment carried as it is their favorite and very difficult to find.

For appetizers we ordered the xxxxxxxx and the xxxxxxxxx which were both absolutely delightful!!

The xxxxxxxx were extremely tender, juicy and flavorful and the horseradish sauce had just a  tiny bite to it which was nice as it wasn’t overpowering.

The xxxx was delicate and fresh and the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx were a beautiful presentation and an amazing flavor combination.  Thumbs up to the chef!!

When the server dropped the check he said “Tonight is industry night, and I’m sure you are in the industry, so I gave you the discount.” Smiled and walked away without verifying.  Agent noted that the discount was 25%.

During the bar evaluation associate sat down first and had brought their Heffe from the dining table setting it on the bar.  Bartender 2 walked up and threw the beer away and asked what he could get associate to drink.  Associate said that he had thrown away the last half of their beer, so bartender 2 vehemently apologized saying that he is always doing that and got him a new beer saying that it was on him.

Agent sat and asked if there was fresh grapefruit juice available to which the answer was no that they were out, so agent ordered a xxxxxxxx.  Bartender 2 prepared the cocktail with a 6 count pour placed it on the beverage napkin and said it was on him because he didn’t have fresh grapefruit.

Only managers and owners are allowed to give away free alcohol. This is an ADLLC Violation.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

3. It is unlawful:  For a distiller, vintner, brewer or wholesaler knowingly to sell, dispose of or give spirituous liquor to any person other than a licensee

Agent offered to buy another guest at the bar a drink at this juncture and they ordered a xxxxxxxxx from Bartender 2.  He poured a 9 count of makers, a 4 count of Rye and then swirled the glass with an Italian sweet vermouth that he said was excellent and promised that they would love this xxxxxx.  He poured the drink from the tin into the martini glass and then dumped about 2 ounces of the mix down the drain.  He made no move to the POS.

Agent called bartender 1 over because I couldn’t get bartender 2’s attention and asked that he add some soda water to the xxxxxxxxxxx as it was made with just water and had no fizz at which time associate stated that it did look like he had only pushed one button and that he may not have known how to make a press.  Bartender 1 rolled his eyes and rudely said to associate that he knew how to make a press.  He then dumped the drink and made a fresh one, but clearly only put sprite in the glass, delivered the drink, made no move to the POS or a comp tab and walked away without a word.  Agent found him quite abrasive.

Later in the evaluation, agent, associate and the 3rd party were chatting about different liquors and specifically over 100 proof items.  We were all agreeing that in certain bars it is not a good idea to have Wild Turkey 101 and Bacardi 151 because of the way people have a tendency to become belligerent when they drink them. 

Bartender 1 jumped into the conversation saying that he totally disagreed and that he was going to prove us wrong to which agent asked how.  He proceeded to get a bottle of “Dirty Bird” he called it, from the dog pound, pour us 3 shots with a laugh and put the bottle away.  He said that he bet we wouldn’t turn into assholes at all.

Later in the evaluation agent asked bartender 1 about the men smoking at the bar to which he said, “as long as you promise to pay the entire fine, including the bar’s fine, you can do whatever you want.” 

He went on to say that they were rich guys that came in all the time and who was he to tell them no.  Agent asked “So I can light up right here if I want?” and bartender 1 replied, “I doubt you could afford it.”  As aforementioned, agent was appalled at this situation and the total disregard by the bartenders.

Throughout the evaluation, all from bartender 2, we ordered 2 more x xx beyond the initial free one, one more xxxxxxxxxxx (which was made with water again) and 4 xxxxxxxxxx for the 3 of us together at the bar. 

The 3rd party agent and associate were with paid for a round of 3 Orange Blossom Beers which was $21 + $5 tip. 

When agent asked for the tab and a bottled water from bartender 2 he said that we didn’t have a tab because he bought the 1st beer and agent’s xxxxxxxxx and that the other guest paid for the 3 more xxxxxx.  Agent said that we had had more than that plus the water and he smiled saying he did not know what I was talking about. 

Agent gave him $20 and said thank you and he put it directly in his pocket, not the tip jar, and left the bar area with a cigarette in his hand.

This means that in addition to the $22.75 discount that the server gave us for no cause of our doing we received 2 xxx beers, 1 xxxx drink, 1 xxxxx Manhattan and 1 xxxxxx for free. All this given to a complete stranger, let alone a trained bartender theft integrity spotter.

That is about $65.75 loss in sales.  Not to mention the 3 shots that we did not order, the 3 food items that were ordered wrong by bartender 2 that other guests ended up eating and the over pours, none of which agent observed being accounted for in any way.

Addendum:

Agent and associate both agreed that it appeared that bartender 2 was on some sort of stimulant drug which we both surmised to be cocaine or methamphetamine. This obviously cannot be substantiated without testing; however, this Agent strongly suspects it.

He did not blink and he bugged his eyes out when speaking, his movements were exaggerated and extremely fast yet clumsy, he spoke quite loud and fast,  he had a difficult time finishing a thought before derailing to another, he was constantly fidgeting with something including sticking his hands in the front and back of the waistband of his pants, etc.

This is an ADLLC Violation.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

24. For a licensee or employee to permit the unlawful possession, use, sale or offer for sale of narcotics, dangerous drugs or marijuana on the premises.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com

bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com

PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2011


Bartender drinking on duty on the owners dime. Customer leaves with liquor bottles.

August 19, 2011 00:50 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

·       Bartender:  Female, 5’5”, Caucasian, in her twenties, with an average build and long, brown hair worn in a ponytail.  She wore a v-neck tee shirt.

The guest volume was minimal at the bar throughout the visit, and the agent observed Bartender from afar.

A female bar patron with long blond hair sat at the left end of the bar throughout most of the visit.  She appeared to be a liquor rep or known to the staff in some way.  She carried a bag from which she drew three colorful bottles of what appeared to be tequila.  Throughout the visit, she had the bottles on the bar and poured shots from them that either she drank, or she gave to the staff and other guests to sample.

Several times, Bartender presented the patron with bottles from behind the bar.  At around 7:43pm, the patron poured from one such bottle—the agent believed to be Cointreau—while seated at the bar, and returned the bottle to Bartender to replace behind the bar. 

This pour did not appear to be recorded nor added to a tab anywhere and therefore is a bartender theft occurrence, and Bartender sipped from the resulting drink. 

Bartender continued to drink alcoholic beverages throughout the visit, in violation of Arizona Liquor Laws.  From the Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 4, Chapter 3, which governs the Arizona Department of Liquor Licensing and Control:

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.

At 8:13pm, Bartender took a drink from another shot glass.  At 8:31pm, she drank again, and took a glass still more than half full with an orange mixture and placed in low behind the bar, quite obviously to drink later. 

At 8:33pm, she was observed to take another drink.

With respect to other bar guests, Bartender appeared to follow proper procedures.  She rang in and cashed out items immediately and properly.  She also delivered establishment-standard pours and followed proper service bar procedures.

Bartender used her down time behind the bar to polish glassware.  She also went out from behind the bar to wait on high-top tables across from the bar.

The aforementioned blond patron was presented with a tab prior to her departure.  The agent believes she had eaten dinner, as well as been drinking.  She departed with at least three open liquor bottles.

Also from the Arizona Revised Statutes:

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.

Bartender observed the agent and his associate as they departed the establishment, smiling and thanking them.

Even were the patron a liquor representative, her actions during the visit should be cause for concern for the establishment.  Aside from being in violation of Arizona Liquor Laws and contributing to the violation thereof by staff members, the activities created a risky and unprofessional environment.

Michael Zenner - CEO      
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.

eyespyspotter.com

bartheft.com
 (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic
. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com

PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2011