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

BARTENDER THEFT: Bar Theft, Palming Stolen Money, Stolen Money to Tip Jar, Underage Drinking, Dram Shop Concerns

March 3, 2014 18:35 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT: Bar Theft, Palming Stolen Money, Stolen Money to Tip Jar, Underage Drinking, Dram Shop Concerns

 

Bartender Summary

The agent observed the following bartenders the evening of June 30th:

-Indoor Bar

·       Xxxxx: Caucasian male, 6’2”, medium build, short dark hair

                                      

·       Xxxxx: Caucasian male, 6’0”, medium build, short dark hair  

-Near Bar

·       Bartender 3: Caucasian male, 6’1”, medium build, short spiked brown hair  

·       Bartender 4: Caucasian male, 6’2”, medium build, short dark hair  



The agent initially approached the nearer of the two outdoor  bars at 7:17.  At that time, all three bartenders were doing their best to keep up with the demand, but from the moment the agent walked in, it was obvious that they were beyond the limit of how much business they could keep up with.  And while both of them were working gamely to do all that they could, it was six minutes before one of them was able to get to a given guest after her arrival.

This was not an isolated incident either, as the experience was typical of the average guest.  Even so, after initially speaking to the agent at 17:23, Bartender 3 was able to present the ordered beverage a mere two minutes later.  Though  it  is worth noting that no beverage napkins were used by either bartender at any point.  Of some additional concern, the agent noted that the bartender never actually rang the order in.  Rather, he approached the POS, and registered a flurry of screen touches that ultimately culminated in a “No sale” screen and the cash being split between the register and tip jar.  Again, this experience was sadly typical.  (see photo below from 8:20).

In addition to multiple “No sale” ring-ins, the agent also witnessed another common practice effective for hiding cash theft:  rather than create and close out each individual order, both Bartenders 3 and 4 had a tendency to leave a tab open at all times, which they would add drinks to and apply cash payments to repeatedly without closing out.  In addition to making the cash sales record a confused jumble, this also gives a readout less than a centimeter in size stating the change due back to the guest. Obviously, in a bar where the nearest guest is ten feet away, this is a serious problem.

Yet two additional methods of outright theft were observed.  At 8:07, Bartender 3 received a drink order and a stack of bills with a suggestion to “keep the change.”  Rather than ring the order in, Bartender 3 held onto it, palmed in one of his hands while going about stocking work, until he eventually dropped it directly in the tip jar.

Similarly, at 8:34, Bartender 4 poured two draft beers for a guest, quoted her a price of $10, then went to the POS, and rang it in for a single draft, pressing the cash button as quickly as possible so that the large “$5.00” display was visible for only a fraction of a second, and then dropped the remainder and tip in the tip jar.

Each of these theft methods relies on quoting a price, waiting for the guest to present cash, and then ringing in something unorthodox to disguise the theft of the overage.

One practice that would go a long way to eliminating these practices would be to insist that bartenders announce the price only after having rung in the items.  This would at least make the practices above more difficult, but the fact that bartenders feel free to just ring in “No sales” and drop in cash means that they are stealing with impunity.  A good way to address this problem would be to have surprise cash drawer changes at random and unannounced times, making it easy for management to prove that some bartenders have impossible overages.  Also, since theft was consistently observed only at the outdoor bars, this would be a way of extending management’s control over the satellite bars that seem to operate with a sense of impunity.

Given the profit motivation the bartenders displayed, it surprised the agent to never see either of them offer food to a guest or even try to upsell to a more expensive brand of liquor, easy ways to increase check and tip averages.

Also, paradoxically, the bartenders were very slow about offering additional drinks to those guests whose had gone empty.  Initially, they were very busy with guests, then with cleaning up and restocking, but after this period, they tended to wait around to be approached rather than offer new drinks to guests sitting there with empties.

The agent also never observed either bartender giving any guest a check for any cash order at any time.  They simply did not do it.  This was even true at the inside bar where rampant theft methods were not observed.

Additionally, other, numerous operating controls seemed to have broken down, especially the system for checking ID.  It is possible that the bartenders were under the impression that IDs were being checked at the door, because no bartender in the establishment or out was ever seen to ask for identification of any guest.  This is obviously a big enough risk for the establishment, but on top of that, much of the crowd that evening was young, including several people that were clearly under 30.  Additionally, by the end of the evening multiple guests made statements both to the bartenders and to fellow patrons to the effect of their being completely intoxicated.  Sure enough, both guests showed all the symptoms of visible intoxication, yet they continued to receive drinks from Bartenders 3 and 4.

Even more worryingly, at 9:27, the agent observed Xxxxx serving a Mojito and a Pomonat to two girls that appeared to the agent to be underage (pictured at left) .  What’s more, Xxxxx not only never carded them, he was also never seen to ring the drink in, meaning that he either delayed the ring-in considerably, or they were given away without being properly comped and accounted for. Agent never observed the drinks to be accounted for.

Obviously, it goes without saying that under New Jersey’s dram shop law, these are massive sources of liability to the establishment, as any damages caused to either any individual or any property by a minor who has been served in a restaurant can be considered the liability of the establishment, and can be recouped by litigation.  In fact, the law is so stringent, that even minors who have not been served on the premises, but have been seen to have been intoxicated on the premises and then go on to cause damages can be a source of liability for the establishment, as the establishment is legally obligated to stop the process.  This is why it is so essential that all guests be identified in terms of age upon entry to the establishment.  Of course, when it comes to intoxicated guests, the liability exists regardless of guests' minor status.

On the other hand, there were minimal problems with correct pouring controls at  both bars.  The only overpour was actually poured by a chef (see “Managers” section for details).

All bartenders appearance was always professional and hygienic, with no cause for concern with respect to their hand washing.  The agent did observe both outdoor bartenders and Xxxxx drinking from plastic cups though.

The outdoor bar farthest from the entrance was closed.

Manager Summary

·       Patio Manager: Caucasian male, 6’0”, short dark hair and goatee , average build, black short-sleeved collared shirt labeled “Baia,”  and black slacks (pictured at right)

·       Chef: Caucasian male, 6’0”, short light brown hair in a baseball cap, glasses, wearing a black chef’s uniform monogrammed with a name beginning “Sch”

For the most part, the agent only observed the Patio Manager.  He was generally busy and effective though.  He was first seen in conversation with the hostess outside the patio bar at 8:16, then was seen circulating around the patio, in one case talking to a guest.

Next, at several times between 8:50 and 9:28, he was seen preparing bar drinks and taking them outside, presumably to help the swamped bartenders.

The only negative finding about the Patio Manager is that he was just five feet away when Xxxxx was seen presenting the alcohol to the seemingly underage guests.

Finally, the Chef described above was briefly observed at 9:20 when he stepped behind the indoor bar, grabbed a goblet, poured himself an eight-count (>3 oz) of Grey Goose, emptied a can of Red Bull over it, and then walked back into the kitchen, taking a large gulp of the drink as he walked. It was not observed to be comped in the POS.

While the Patio Manager was doing a laudable job of assisting his staff, in the agent’s opinion, his time might have been better spent by inspiring a bit of fear of authority in his bar staff.

There were no guest problems at any point that required manager intervention.


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. 2014


BARTENDER THEFT: Bar Theft, Free Drinks, Employye Alcohol Consumption, ADLLC Violations

March 3, 2014 00:30 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT: Bar Theft, Free Drinks, Employye Alcohol Consumption, ADLLC Violations

Bartender Summary                                                                                                    

·       Bartender 1:  Caucasian male, approximately 6’, athletic build, wearing a black uniform t-shirt, jeans, and a black hat.

·       Bartender 2:  Caucasian male, approximately 5’10, thin build, brown hair worn in a xxxxxx, wearing a black uniform t-shirt, and jeans.

·       Bartender 3:  Caucasian female, approximately 5’3, petite build, with long blonde hair, wearing a female style uniform t-shirt.

Throughout the evaluation Bartender 1, Bartender 2, and Bartender 3 were extremely distracted and barely interacted with those patrons seated at the bar.  Throughout the evaluation Bartender 1, Bartender 2, and Bartender 3 appeared to be more interested in each other, the serving staff, or their cell phones than they were the customers at the bar.  Only on few occasions did Bartender 3 appear to engage in conversation and flirtatious banter with some of the bar patrons.  Otherwise, Bartender 1, Bartender 2, and Bartender 3 were observed walking around the bar, fidgeting with glassware, bottles, or their cell phones.

The more extreme examples of this behavior include:

At 10:26pm Bartender 1 was texting or playing on his cell phone.  He was observed with his head down using his cell phone for over 3 minutes straight.  He glanced up a few times during this period but did not stop texting.

At 10:56pm Bartender 3 was observed using/texting on her cell phone for almost five minutes.  Bartender 3 was also looking down at her cell phone most of the time, glancing around a few times but not moving from the spot in which she stood.

Additionally observations include:

At 11:09pm Bartender 1 was observed aggressively smacking his mouth while chewing gum behind the bar.

At 11:31pm Bartender 1 used his mixing tin to scoop ice from the ice bin for beverages.  While pouring the ice into the glasses Bartender 1 placed his hand over the tin, preventing the ice from falling out and not landing in the glass, guiding the ice with his hand.  As a patron, the agent would have been bothered by this behavior, not wanting Bartender 1’s hands, which had notably not been washed or cleaned for most of the evaluation, all over the ice within the agent’s beverage. This is also an AZ Health Code Violation.

At 10:32pm the agent noted that Bartender 1 was drinking out of a plastic cup behind the bar.  The cup was closed with a lid and Bartender 1 used a straw as per liquor law and health code requirements.  However, the substance within the drink was a light color with a lemon inside the cup.  It is possible that the drink was just Iced Tea, however, the way Bartender 1 sipped the beverage over the course of the evaluation leads the agent to speculate that the beverage may not have been a non-alcoholic beverage and may have been alcohol. This is obviously speculation, but from his mannerisms, I'm fairly certain of it.  If so this is an ADLLC Violation.

At 11:54pm Bartender 3 was observed drinking a redbull directly out of the can, leaving the can by her register when she was not drinking it. ths iis an AZ Health Code Violation.

In addition several beverages were observed being served without being charged for as well as not being accounted for within the POS:

At around 10:20pm a local delivery man from a Mexican restaurant entered the establishment delivering food for Bartender 2.  The delivery was handed to Bartender 1 and then Bartender 2 came by to greet the delivery man.  While Bartender 1 was standing there talking to the delivery man Bartender 2 poured the delivery man two shots of jager in two separate shot glasses.  The delivery man drank one immediately, chatted with Bartender 1 and Bartender 2 for several minutes, took the second shot and left.  Neither of the shots were charged for nor recorded in the POS.

At 11:33pm Bartender 1 was observed serving two Vodka Redbulls to patrons standing at the bar.  These patrons appeared to know the MOD and the staff.  Neither drink was charged for nor accounted for in the POS.

 

Wait Staff Summary                                                                                                     

Server 1:  Named Xxxxx; Caucasian female, approximately 5’4, medium build, with dirty blonde/brown curly hair, wearing a black female uniform t-shirt, a black wool hat, and jeans.

Server 2:  Named Xxxxx; Caucasian female, approximately 5’3, petite build, with long blonde hair, wearing a uniform female t-shirt, and jeans.  Xxxxx was training that evening.

The agent and associate sat at a table and were approached by Xxxxx and Xxxxx after waiting several minutes.  Xxxxx placed beverage napkins onto the table and asked the agent and associate what they wanted to drink.  The agent and associate placed drink orders (Please see Food and Beverage for details).

Over the course of the evaluation only the associate was IDed however both the associate and the agent received alcoholic beverages (Please see Food and Beverage for details).

After viewing the menu the agent and associate placed a food order with Xxxxx and Xxxxx (Please see Food and Beverage for details).  The agent asked a question which neither Xxxxx nor Xxxxx knew the answer to (Please see Food and Beverage for details).

While the agent and associate ate the first course Xxxxx and Xxxxx checked in a few times. During one of these check-ins the associate ordered an additional beverage.  The agent is not sure how long it took for this beverage to be delivered, although it was at least five minutes.  Considering the low volume of business, the agent and associate felt that this wait time was not appropriate.

Regarding the second course the agent asked Xxxxx for something which was immediately provided, which the agent greatly appreciated (please see Food and Beverage for details).

Considering the low level of business again, the agent and associate felt that the wait time for the second course was also longer than appropriate (Please see Food and Beverage for details).

When the food was delivered the agent ordered an additional beverage through Xxxxx.  There was an issue with the beverage that was not Xxxxx’s fault, however, Xxxxx handled this issue very well (Please see Food and Beverage for details).

When the agent and associate were finished with their meal the agent requested the check.  The check was promptly provided and paid for.  There was no customer receipt included with the bill, however, and another item on the bill was very odd (Please see Food and Beverage for details).

As a training server it is expected that Xxxxx would be on her best behavior, which she was.  The agent and associate were surprised, however, at Xxxxx’s performance in comparison to Xxxxx’s, Xxxxx seeming to slack and be less helpful as well as be a bad role model and trainer for Xxxxx considering her lack of knowledge and lack of attention.

Xxxxx was a very friendly and attentive server, on the other hand.  However, throughout the meal the table was not maintained, leaving a clutter of dirty plates and glassware for almost the entire meal.

Security Summary

·       Security 1- Caucasian male, approximately 5’10, with an athletic build and dark short hair, wearing a black t-shirt and jeans.

When the agent and associate approached there was no Security stationed at the door nor did there appear to be security staff within the establishment.  Consequently, no patrons were being IDed upon entering, which, based on the assumption of staff assuming the patrons had been IDed, caused some patrons to not be IDed at all.

About half way through the evaluation there was a single security guard that was noted to have arrived and started working.

Security 1 was observed walking into the establishment only several times during the evaluation, spending most of his time at or near the front entrance.

On the agent and associate’s way out Security 1 wished the agent and associate a good evening.

Although it appeared that only staff and a few friends of staff walked through the back door of the establishment that went into the back parking lot, the agent warns that there was no staff member watching that entrance/exit throughout the evaluation.  The agent notes that this is an easy area for underage individuals to enter the establishment and be assumed as having been IDed by the servers and bartenders.

Overall, the agent is not sure whether or not the security staff was short just for that evening or if only one staff member was scheduled.  The agent also does not assume that Security 1 was necessarily late.  Nonetheless, the agent does warn that the establishment was not being watched over in the way security staff would and should, IDing all patrons at the door and watching all entrances.  Such responsibilities should be handled, therefore, by the rest of the staff watching for incoming patrons through the back entrance and IDing all patrons as they are served, however, this did not appear to be the case either, causing the establishment to have face the risk of serving underage and/or intoxicated patrons.

Food and Beverage Summary

When the agent and associate entered the establishment there was no security working at the door.  The agent and associate were, therefore, not IDed upon initial entry into the facility.

The agent and associate sat at a table and were greeted by Xxxxx and Xxxxx.  Xxxxx placed down beverage napkins and asked the agent and associate what they would like to drink.  The agent ordered a water and the associate ordered a corona.  At this point the associate was IDed, however, the agent was not due to the fact that the agent only ordered water.

In addition the agent asked Xxxxx if the agent and associate could have another menu since there was only one on the table.  Xxxxx did not appear to understand why the agent wanted another menu, and then assumed based on the disheveled appearance of the first menu, that the agent wanted a cleaner menu. Nonetheless, the agent wanted an additional menu for the associate to look at as well.

When Xxxxx returned with the corona the agent and associate ordered nachos as an appetizer and stated that they would continue to browse the menu to look for larger items.

Ten minutes later the nachos arrived, served in a large plastic basket on top of a wax sheet.  There was cheese sauce drizzled over the chips, a handful of sliced jalapenos, a handful of diced tomatoes, and a large dollop of sour cream.  The agent and associate were extremely disappointed with the nachos, however.  The nachos came out barely room temperature and it was obvious that the jalapenos and tomatoes had just been sprinkled onto the chips, instead of having some salsa or pico de gallo on the chips, giving the nachos a more complex flavor.  Instead the nachos were very basic and cold, both the agent and associate feeling they could make better nachos in their homes with basic ingredients.

When the agent was finished with his first beverage Xxxxx returned and asked if the agent and associate were interested in additional beverages.  The associate ordered another Corona.  The associate and agent were also ready to order their food at this point.

The agent asked Xxxxx what the “healthy heart special” was, which she did not know.  Xxxxx asked Xxxxx and Xxxxx was not aware either.  Xxxxx directed Xxxxx to ask the MOD who informed her that it was a pesto chicken meal.

When Xxxxx returned with the information the associate placed an order for the Social Burger with fries and the agent placed an order for the loaded grilled cheese with fries.

Nine minutes later the agent realized that the agent had forgotten to ask for the Grilled cheese without the pesto sauce.  The agent flagged down Xxxxx and apologized, informing her of the modification.  Xxxxx ran upstairs to inform that chef and quickly returned stating that the agent need not worry and that Xxxxx had caught the chef just in time.

16 minutes after the second course was ordered it was delivered by Xxxxx.  Xxxxx asked if the agent or associate needed anything else.  The agent asked for a coke.  Xxxxx left to retrieve the coke but shortly returned stating that the syrup was low and needed to be changed.  Xxxxx stated that the agent would receive her beverage as soon as the coke was changed.  Several minutes later the drink was delivered.

The agent’s food was very good.  The grilled cheese served on soft, thick bread, with hot, thick, gooey cheese in the center.  The fries were hot and crisp with a soft center.  Overall, the agent’s meal was very satisfying.

The associate’s meal was okay but not impressive.  Again the associate felt that the burger was comparable to a burger the associate would make for himself at home.  The meat was good, and cooked as per the associate’s request.  The bun was soft and warm.  There was nothing in particular that was wrong with the meal, however, there was nothing particularly noteworthy either.

When the agent and associate were finished with their meals the agent requested the check.  The bill was presented in a clean check presenter with seemingly accurate charges.  Upon closer examination the agent noted an odd discount on the bill that did not pertain to any problem the agent and associate had.

The agent provided a credit card for the bill, which Xxxxx promptly ran and returned.  At this point the bill was returned with a receipt to sign, however, without a customer copy.

Overall the agent thought that Xxxxx was working very hard to provide the best service with her level of training.  The food, however, was mostly disappointing and the kitchen appeared to be taking an inappropriate amount of time considering the low level of business.

 

Promotional Addendum:

During the evaluation there were three promotional models working to promote Bacardi.  The MOD made two separate mixtures with Bacardi; one with coke, and one with juices.  At this point the coke syrup was already low and, unaware of the issue, the MOD poured the shots with what tasted like watered down coke.  This was evident in the flavor of the shots provided by the models.

Due to the fact that the agent had not ordered an alcoholic beverage and, therefore, had not been IDed, when the agent did receive Bacardi shots from the promotional models the facility ended up serving a patron that had not been verified.  Although the agent is of legal age to drink, the agent warns that such slip-ups run the risk of serious penalties.  The agent feels that all staff should always ID patrons, especially when security is not checking IDs at the door, and, additionally, especially when promotional models are handing out free shots.

MOD Addendum:

MOD-  Caucasian male, approximately 5’7, wearing a black suit, black shirt, and ablack large, wool hat/beanie.

At 10:28pm the MOD poured and served to pink, mixed shots to the Bacardi Promo Girls.  Neither shot was accounted for in the POS.

At 11:15pm the MOD served the promo girls three large shots that appeared to be small glasses of an ADIOS mixture, possibly the equivalent of 2-3 ounces.

At 11:55pm the MOD poured and served 4 more mixed shots, one for himself, and three for the promo girls.

Although in accordance with the expectations of the MOD provided by the business owners, the MOD may have the ability to provide free shots and not have to account for them, the agent still warns that Promotional Contracted Models are still considered patrons regarding alcohol consumption.  After having consumed over 6 ounces of mixed drinks in the form of 3 shots, within an hour and a half, the girls appeared to be comfortably intoxicated, however, if either of them drove from the establishment at midnight when they left, all three of them would have had a high BAC level and thus a dram shop liquor liability issue.

The agent also noted that throughout the evaluation the MOD appeared to be solely concerned with the promo girls and not concerned with the management of the business, in the Agent's opinion.

 

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. 2014


BARTENDER THEFT: Bar Theft, Intoxicated Patrons, Free Drinks for Friends, Bartender Pockets Money

March 3, 2014 00:16 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT: Bar Theft, Intoxicated Patrons, Free Drinks for Friends, Bartender Pockets Money

 

Bartender Summary                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

·       Bartender 1:  Xxxxx, Caucasian fem ale, about 5’5”tall, thin, long blond curled hair, wearing a black bustier, a black jacket and a black skirt. (Pictured)

·       Bartender 2:  Xxxxx, Caucasian female, about 5’4”tall, thin build, long straight blond hair worn up on the sides, wearing a black and gray striped shirt and a black skirt.

·       Bartender 3:  Caucasian male, about 5’7”tall, stocky athletic build, short light brown spiky hair, wearing a black shirt and black pants with  a sweat band and church key on his arm.

·       Bartender 4:  Caucasian male, about 5’9”tall, thin build, short dark hair, wearing black rimmed glasses, a black hoodie with the hood on and black pants.

·       Bartender 5:  Caucasian male, about 5’8”tall, medium build, short dark hair, wearing a black shirt and black pants.

·       Bartender 6:  Caucasian female, about 5’6”tall, long straight brown hair, wearing a black shirt and black skirt.

·       Bartender 7:  Xxxxx, Caucasian male, about 5’11”tall, large build, short dark hair, facial hair, dark rimmed glasses, wearing a dark shirt and pants.

·       Bartender 8:  Caucasian male, about 5’9”tall, medium build, short dark hair, wearing a black shirt and black pants

·       Bartender 9:  Caucasian female, about 5’7”tall, thin build, long dark curled hair, wearing a black bustier and a black skirt.

·       Bartender 10:  African American female, about 5’5”tall, thin build, long dark hair in a ponytail, wearing a black bustier and a black skirt.

In this summary the downstairs Radius bar will be referred to as bar 1, the downstairs Xxxxx bar will be bar 2 and the upstairs Xxxxx bar will be referred to as bar 3.  Bartender 10 was at the upstairs Xxxxx bar which was not evaluated due to the fact agent could not get to the bar as this area was extremely crowded.

Agent approached bartender 1 at bar 1 upon entering the establishment.  She looked over at agent, leaned forward and asked what she could get agent to drink.   Agent placed a drink order and Xxxxx quickly made the drink using the proper recipe.  She poured about a 6 count pour for this drink.  She served it to the agent and gave agent a price.  Agent gave her a card and she went to the POS rang in the drink and processed the payment.  She returned the credit card receipt in a clean black check presenter.

When agent’s drink was empty Xxxxx asked if agent would like another.  Agent said yes and she quickly made the drink and processed the payment in the same fashion as above.

Some observations made while at bar 1:

At 11:56pm Two Caucasian females that appeared to be Xxxxx’s friends approached bar 1 and she excitedly said hello to them.  She then poured each of them a double vodka cranberry tall.  No money was exchanged nor was anything rang up in the POS.

At 12:00am a Caucasian male and female couple approached the bar and the male shouted Xxxxx’s name.  He said he wanted a bottle of champagne and Xxxxx repeated the order.  He said yes and said “give it to me for $40” Xxxxx said she couldn’t do that.  She got the bottle of champagne, opened it and then served it to the couple.  She then took the $100.00 bill from the male patron and went to the POS where she entered an open charge of $45.00.  She then gave the male patron the proper amount of change back.  He tipped her what appeared to be a large sum and she put the cash into the tip jar.

At 12:03pm an African American male patron approached the bar.  Xxxxx happily waved to him and grabbed his hand.  They talked which agent could not over hear.  Agent then saw Xxxxx move to the well and proceed to make 12 double shots in tall glasses.  The shots were made with vodka, triple sec, cranberry juice, additional liquor and other ingredients agent could not recall.  The shots filled each glass 2/3 to ¾ full.  She made these shots in 4 separate batches and as she would make 3 she would handle them to the man and he would hand them back to the crowd standing behind him.  When she served the last shots Xxxxx waived off the man and then went to the POS.  Agent saw the screen display VOID then she tapped a square about 4 times and closed the screen.  Agent is unsure exactly what she put in the POS but it was not 12 double shots.   There was no money transferred, not even a tip that agent saw.

Around 12:08pm Xxxxx served 2 Caucasian females in their early 20’s standing at the bar.  She served them 5 drinks at one time; the drinks sat in front of the 2 girls and agent did not see the drinks distributed to anyone else.  About 3 minutes later Xxxxx served these same 2 girls each a fireball shot.  That is 7 drinks in 3 minutes for these 2 young ladies.  She did ring all these drinks into the POS.

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 12:24pm a Caucasian female approached Xxxxx and asked for a vodka cranberry.  Xxxxx poured the female Absolute without asking for a preference.  She then rang up the drink at the premium price.

Agent noticed all bartenders at this bar using cups or tins as ice scoops.  They all appeared to pour a 5-6 count pour per regular shots.

Bartender 4 was at the well facing the dance floor down from Xxxxx and Xxxxx.  Agent was wondering what his actual job was as he was seen standing behind the bar dancing and getting up on the reach in cooler to dance the majority of time agent was at the bar.  Around 12:20am agent finally saw him pour a couple of drinks for patrons.

Agent observed bartender 3 and bartender 5 from afar.  They appeared to ring in every drink and to stay busy.  Agent did not see either one with hands in the tip jar or waiving patrons off.

Agent then moved on to bar 2.  Agent approached the bar and was immediately greeted by bartender 6.  She was very friendly, said hello and asked agent what she could agent get to drink.  Bartender 6 quickly made and served agent’s drink.  She gave agent a price.  Agent gave her a credit card and she went to the POS, rang up the drink and gave agent the receipt to the agent in a clean black check presenter.  She thanked the agent.  Bartender 6 could not find an ingredient for agent’s drink so agent changed the drink.  Bartender 6 quickly adapted and made agent the second choice.

 

Observations made at bar 2.

Agent observed bartender 6 with other patrons and she seemed to serve all other patrons in the same fashion as agent.  Agent also observed bartender 8 from afar.  He appeared to ring in all drinks served.  They both were seen to pour a 4-6 count pour and used cups or tins as ice scoops.

Around 12:40am agent saw Xxxxx walk behind bar 2 and talk with bartender 8 and Xxxxx.

About 12:51am Xxxxx began breaking down his well by the patio entrance.  At around 12:57am 3 patrons walked up; 2 Caucasian males and 1 Caucasian female.  They appeared to know Xxxxx and he told them he was getting out of there.  He then served them 2 shots of Jager and a shot of Fire ball.  He did not move to the register or collect any money.

The patrons stayed at the bar and talked to Xxxxx.  At 1:00am Xxxxx gave each of them a bottle beer.  The blond male then gave Xxxxx money.  Xxxxx looked around and then put the money into his pocket.  Right after a Caucasian male patron walked up to the well and placed an order with Xxxxx.  Xxxxx made and served the drink and went to the POS.

Agent then went onto bar 3 upstairs.  Agent approached the bar and was immediately greeted by bartender 9.  She smiled at agent and asked what she could get agent to drink.  Agent placed an order.  Bartender 9 made the drink incorrectly and served it to agent.  She did not use a cocktail napkin.  Agent gave her a credit card and she rang up the drink and gave agent the credit card receipt in a clean black check presenter.  She said thank you.

Agent observed bartender 9 to ring in every drink she made.  She poured about a 5 count pour.  Her hands were never in the tip jar and she attempted to keep the bar top clean.  Bartender 9 appeared friendly and to do a good job.

Agent left through the Xxxxx side of the establishment when agent left Xxxxx was behind the bar at Xxxxx’s well and appeared to be working that well.

Security Summary

There were several members of security seen inside and outside the establishment; way too many for agent to describe.  They all presented well and were dressed professionally.  Agent personally spoke with the member at the VIP ropes who was a tall male with a bald head wearing a dark suit.  He seemed friendly enough and directed agent to the will-call table.  Upon leaving 2 different security members told agent to have a good night.

There were no problems that agent is aware of.

There were a lot of really drunk patrons noticed by the agent.  Agent witnessed two separate females in the ladies room who could barely stand.  One of them almost fell twice but her friend caught her.  Over serving was quite evident.  With the amount of people in the establishment this could be quite dangerous.           

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

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.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Food and Beverage Summary

At bar 1 agent ordered 2 identical rounds.

A dirty martini and Bud Light bottle.  The martini was made with the well vodka and olive juice from the fruit tray.  The martini glass was chilled and the martini well shaken.  It was served with 2 olives on a skewer.  The martini was cold and tasted fine.  The Bud Lights were served cold and fresh.  Agent was charged $16.00 for each round.

At bar 2 agent ordered a dirty martini.  Bartender 6 could not find any olive juice and had only poured the vodka in the tin.  Agent told her she could just make it a Cosmo.  She asked if agent was sure and agent said yes that it sounded good.  She then made the Cosmo and served it up in a chilled martini glass and garnished with a lime twist.  Agent was charged $6.00 for this drink.

At bar 3 agents ordered another Cosmo.  Bartender 9 filled a short glass with ice, poured well vodka and cranberry juice then put a straw in it and served it to agent.  This was a vodka cranberry and in no way a Cosmo other than sharing the vodka and cranberry in common.  If she did not have martini glasses agent feels she should have said something.  Agent was charged $8.00 for this drink.

There was quite a discrepancy in the difference of prices and at each bar agent was served well vodka, as this might be representative of the bartenders book boosting drinks for more profits.

 

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. 2014


BARTENDER THEFT: Stolen Money Laundered through Tip Jar

November 28, 2012 20:31 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

The agent observed the following bartenders the evening of June 29th:

-xxxxxx Bar

·       Xxxxx: Caucasian female, 5’10’, medium build, straight dark brown hair pulled back in a bun

                                                                      

·       Xxxxx: Caucasian male, 6’0”, medium build, short dark hair

·       Xxxxx: Caucasian male, 6’2”, medium build, short dark hair    )

-xxxxx Bar

·       Bartender 4: Caucasian male, 6’2”, medium build, short dark hair

 

 

 

 

The agent initially sat at the indoor bar at 23:23.  At that time, all three bartenders were doing what they could to drum up business where possible, though there was about one bartender for every three to four guests.  This meant that a fair amount of conversing was happening, both among bartenders, and between bartenders and guests.

Even so, Xxxxx approached the agent immediately, extending a warm greeting and offering something to drink.

As soon as the agent placed an order, Xxxxx set about making it, using the ice scoop to prepare the drinks and using beverage napkins.  These were the practices each time a drink was made at the inside bar.  She also rang the order in immediately and correctly, which was also standard practice at the indoor bar.

The only shortcoming observed among all bartenders was a failure to attempt to upsell to a more expensive liquor.  This is an easy way of raising check totals without adding significant additional effort that all staff should be encouraged to do.

When the agent approached the outdoor bar farthest from the main entrance, Bartender 4 was not quite so quick to greet the agent, taking four minutes to do so.  Also, Bartender 4 was never seen to use a beverage napkin, and was once observed scooping ice directly into a plastic cup which is a health concern.

Also, Bartender 4 was a bit slow about offering additional drinks to those guests whose had gone empty.  For example, at 10:54, the agent’s glass was empty, but Bartender 4 didn’t offer another drink until 11:03.

Another way in which bar performance was less than ideal was the way bartenders rang in drinks.  For example, they usually rang drinks in immediately after making them.  When extremely busy, though, they even tended to leave one meta-tab open for cash orders, in which they would add each guest’s round, then input the amount of cash handed over.  This method shows a screen with very small text stating the amount of change due, and creates an excellent opportunity for padding the cost by a few dollars in order to illegally increase tips.  Agent found this alarming.

This would not have been a  huge concern but for the fact that the agent observed Bartender 4 ring in multiple “no sales” at times when he produced drinks and put cash in the drawer, including at 11:13 and 11:35.  What’s more, both the “no sale” rings were when Bartender 4 was given cash and told to keep the change. It is suspected that the drawer may be used to launder stolen money.

Also alarming, the agent never received a receipt from any bartenders the entire evening, and even though both bartenders served the agent a draft beer and a well drink, the quoted price was $11.25 inside and $11.50 outside.

                  

The agent also never observed any bartender securing a credit card in order to assure the payment of a tab without the guest offering the card first.

No bartender was ever seen to check the identification of a single guest.  This was in spite of the fact that much of the crowd that evening was young, including several people that were clearly under 30.

Similarly, the  outside bar area had a group of three obviously intoxicated people, who  were slurring, red, and sweating profusely.

Obviously, it goes without saying that this is a serious source of liability to the establishment, as any damages caused to either any individual or any property by a minor who has been served in a restaurant can be considered as grounds for revoking an establishment’s liquor license.  Certainly, this development would be disastrous for ownership, but it is the agent’s opinion that it is worth mentioning this to the staff and reminding them that such a scenario would involve them losing their livelihood too.   Additionally, under New Jersey’s dram shop legislation, such a scenario would also leave the establishment and the individual employee that served a minor or intoxicated person personally liable for damages caused by that person.

Similarly, there were some small problems with correct pouring controls by Bartender 4.  On one occasion at 11:03, Bartender 4 was making a rum and Coke for a guest, and poured it with a 6-count (4 count = 1 1/2 oz).  When the guest asked what the well rum was, Bartender 4 asked “Why?  You don’t like it?”  Then said “There’s a solution to that,” as he added another 3-count of Bacardi to the drink.  This was never rung in as a comp, and when all was said and done, the guest had more than a double for the cost of a shot of well liquor.  Moreover, this is a dangerous amount of alcohol for one drink and possesses a liquor liability issue.

Similarly, at 12:10, Xxxxx told a guest that a soft drink was on her, but was never seen to ring it in as a comp.

It did not seem that Bartender 4 knew the guest, rather, this excessive pour seemed to be a result of inattention and willingness to give away product.  This is a problem that could be remedied by making sure that all bottles, even those who which have irregular  sizes and shapes, have precision metered  pour spouts for the sake of accuracy.

What’s more, a staff member (pictured) was sitting at the bar from 10:52 until after the agent left the area at 11:07.  The entire time that she was there, Bartender 4 was pouring her eight ounce pours of  red wine from Salmon Run,  which he would place on the side of the bar nearest him, so that she would have to reach over the bar to take each drink and put it back each time, as seen in the photo at left.  This made the agent think that they had some reason to hide this activity, and the fact that the agent placed the drink there without it being requested made the agent think this was something that they had done before.  Before the agent left, Bartender 4 filled her drink a total of  three times, a total of nearly five glasses of wine. The agent never observed Bartender 4 accounting for these drinks in a comp or shift-drink ticket on the

POS.

 

At one point, another staff member (pictured) was sitting with them, and was drinking a soft drink, though it was impossible to tell if anything alcoholic had been mixed in.  At one point, a third employee approached them, saying “Alex, are you checked out yet,” to which one of the two employees responded “No.”     

At 11:27, Bartender 4 was seen drinking something a bit lighter than the color of cola from a plastic pint.  He kept the drink on the service well station.  Agent suspects an alcohol drink was being consumed; however, cannot substantiate this claim.

Similarly, there was an irregularity between bartenders and servers at the service well, as at 10:31 a server walked behind the bar, an unnecessary breakdown of the bar controls, and one that bartenders should be motivated to avoid, as any blame for a problem arising from a server behind the bar would ultimately be their fault.

                                            

Additionally, all bartenders’ appearance was always professional and hygienic, with the only exception being that they were never seen washing their hands.

Food and Beverage Summary

The agent and associate started off at the indoor bar with a Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and a well gin and tonic. The former was served in a stemmed, fluted Pilsener glass, and the latter in a stemmed goblet with plenty of ice and lime, but no straw or drink stirrer.  The gin and tonic was made with the appropriate proportions, and was extremely refreshing and flavorful.  The pale ale also tasted just as expected, and was poured perfectly by Xxxxx.  IT was clearly fresh and well handled.

The agent’s party left the indoors and seated themselves at the bar farthest from the main entrance.   nearest the TouchTunes machine.  The agent was waited on by Server 1, who seemed to be the only server on duty.  There, they ordered a Harpoon India Pale Ale and a rum and Diet Coke. Both drinks came in translucent plastic pints, the beer with a perfect head, and the cocktail with ample ice.  IPA also tasted very fresh and flavorful, and showed no signs of age or oxidation.  It was excellent.

The cocktail was the rum and coke described in the “Bartenders” section above.  Aside from being stronger than expected, the drink tasted strongly of artificial vanilla flavor, which was why the agent asked about the well rum offering. That was when Bartender 4 “[solved] the problem” by pouring in nearly another full serving of Bacardi.

If they are giving away alcohol to strangers, and one who happens to be a bar theft integrity spotter, management can interpolate the problem from there.

All beverages were traditionally presented in intact glassware, at the proper temperatures and with all expected flavor characteristics.  What’s more, the agent was satisfied with both the breadth of the establishment’s selection, and especially with the value that it offered.

Because of the traffic the agent encountered on the way to the evaluation, by the time the outdoor bar nearest the main entrance was was approached, it was 11:30, and they were already closing.

 

Manager Summary

·       Bar Manager : Caucasian male, 6’0”, short dark hair, average build, yellow short-sleeved collared shirt  and black slacks (pictured at right)

·       Patio Manager: Caucasian male, 6’0”, short dark hair and goatee , average build, black short-sleeved collared shirt labeled “Xxxxx,”  and black slacks (pictured at left)

·       General Manager: Caucasian female, 5’9”, short graying brown hair, medium build, sky blue short-sleeved collared shirt and black slacks (pictured at right)

 


 

 

In general, the agent’s observations of the managers were brief and fleeting.  The first and only glimpse of the Bar manager was at 10:28.  At that time, the manager was standing beside the indoor bar, drinking a Long Trail Belgian White Ale (pictured at right).  Immediately after finishing it within two minutes, the Bar Manager stepped behind the bar, ringing something up in the POS.  This is a cause for concern, as it is a best practice not to have anyone who has been drinking behind the bar.  In a dram shop suit or identification compliance sting, this would not reflect well on the establishment.

The Patio Manager was seen several times outside, and was generally either talking to employees or just taking the scene in.  He was not present for the period in which Bartender 4 was pouring free house wine for an employee on the patio.

Finally, the General Manager was observed at 11:57 when she brought out a new cash drawer to Xxxxx, with whom she exchanged it for the older drawer.

The only major criticism of the managers was that they completely failed to address the two problems of obviously intoxicated guests being served and employees drinking at the establishment.  In fact, the Bar manager was himself drinking the only time the agent saw him.

There were no guest problems at any point that required manager intervention, but it is also worth mentioning that the agent never observed any of the managers communicating with any guests.

At 11:34, the agent returned to the indoor bar, ordering a Long Trail White Ale and a Diet Coke.  Both were served in fluted, stemmed Pilseners, and the soft drink came with ice.  Both beverages tasted pleasant and expected. Xxxxx declined to charge the agent for the soft drink

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: Free Drinks, Stolen Money Put Directly In Tip Jar

November 10, 2012 16:42 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary –

•    Bar 1 - xxx xxxxx, mid xx, light colored hair with xxxxx xxxxxx xxx xxxxx.

•    Bar 2 - xxxx xxxx, early 30s, xxxxxxx xxxx xxxx, xxxxx logo T-shirt.   

Both bartenders were observed greeting patrons in a reasonable amount of time. While they appeared to be friendly and sociable, especially with their friends and regulars, neither introduced themselves by name at any time during the visit. Neither were overly friendly to anyone they did not already know. As newbie customers, we felt rather alienated.

Agent would suggest management speak to these bartenders and remind them that every regular was at one time a newbie, they liked the place enough to come back because of this. When your particularly unfriendly to new guests, it short circuits this renewed clientele cycle, and revenue volumes will start to steadily decrease. Agent notes this at the beginning of the report as it was a central theme throughout the audit period

Coasters were used but not consistently and the ice scoop was not used at all by Bar 1. Agent was rather surprised that a bartender at this level of restaurant would make such a rookie move as to scoop ice in this manner. It's dangerous, it's unhygienic and is also an Health Code Violation. Bar 2 used the ice scoop occasionally but not consistently, also using the metal shaker.

Moreover, Bar 1, after scooping the ice with the metal shaker in one hand he would use his other hand to guide the ice into the glass. His hands touched the ice of every single drinking made which was rather disgusting to watch, especially after I viewed him touch his nose several times with his fingers. If there was too much ice in the glass he would scoop it out with his fingers. This is not only a health code violation, but just really not pleasant to see. It made us want to tab out and leave.

After Bar 1 scooped the ice with the metal shaker he would spin it in his hand before setting it back on the bar top.

Bar 1 and Bar 2 were observed offering food and drink menus to patrons as well as reviewing with them.

Both bartenders were observed making drinks and then moving to the POS although no one guest at the bar had a receipt in front of them.

Agent observed several people running tabs and neither bartender asked for any credentials from the patron or a credit card to hold the tab open.


This is a very poor business practice which is enhanced when there are two bartenders. In the event that one and bartender forgets or delays (grouping orders) to ring up a drink and the other bartender prints out the tab for the patron, drinks could be missed being charged. Agent recommends that the bartenders place an updated receipt in front of each guest in a small rocks glass, and following a strict "make a drink - ring a drink policy." Agent also recommends securing tabs with a credit card.

at 10:45 PM Agent observed Bar 1 greet 3 males at the bar each one giving them a fist bump, which signified to the bar spotter that they were well acquainted with each other. They spoke for a moment and then Bar 1 proceeded to make SIX double shot Grey Goose and Red Bull drinks. Each man then threw up a $10.00 bill and they all fist bumped again before the men departed. Bar 1 gathered up the $30.00 in cash, paused a moment to look around, and then deposited all the cash directly into the tip jar.

Both bartenders made and served shots to many of the patrons at the bar and then move to the POS but it is difficult to tell whether or not they actually rang them up or ring them up accurately as no receipts were produced. Agent has been bar spotting for a long time and highly suspects an integrity bartender theft issue but was unable to fully substantiate the claim. Agent suggests follow up on this from further Eye Spy Agents.

Bar 1 was observed mixing drinks with the standard four count pour method but always topped off each drink with another tail of a pour, so therefore delving additional alcohol for each drink. Delivering additional alcohol of more than what is prescribed by management for financial and/or social gain is considered bartender theft.

Bar 2 was consistent with a four count pour.

Both bartenders poured beers with the appropriate collar.

Both bartenders were observed being attentive to the patrons at the bar and offering additional drinks at the appropriate times.

The bar top and the back bar appeared to be clean and neat and well-organized.

Agent thought that both bartenders were a little lax in the way they were dressed, especially Bar 1 who was wearing a baseball cap on backwards. Agent understands the look/feel of a casual bar/restaurant; however, this looked more like he was headed to a ball game or party as opposed to being at work. Agent recommends the bartenders appearance should be uniform in the type and color of shirts they wear.

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: Free drinks, Liquor Law Violations, Employee Alcohol Consumption,

November 10, 2012 16:03 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary                                                                                                            

§        

·       Bar 1:  Named Xxxxx, xxxxxxxxxxx male, athletic build, approximately 6’0”, with short black hair, wearing a black Xxxxx T-Shirt, and grey shorts.  Later in the evening these pants were changed to white and blue striped xxxxxxxxxx.

·       Bar 2:  xxxxxxxxxxxxx female, thin build, approximately 5’6 with long, straight xxxxx hair, wearing a pink tank top, black shorts, and axxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx .

·       Bar 3:  xxxxxxxxxx female, thin build, approximately 5’3, with long xxxx hair, wearing a white, button up shirt, with three-quarter length sleeves, a pink crop-top underneath, and jean shorts.

·       Bar 4:  xxxxxxxxxx male, medium build, approximately 6’0, with dark hair and a xxxxxxxx, wearing an Xxxxx T-Shirt, and jeans.

·       Bar 5:  xxxxxxxxxx male, thin build, approximately 6’2, with xxxxxxx hair, xxxxxxxxxxx, wearing a black Xxxxx tank top, and xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

The agent and associate approached the bar and were immediately greeted by Bartender 1, Xxxxx, whose name was overheard rather than provided by introduction.  Xxxxx was the only bartender on shift at that time.  Xxxxx leaned onto the bar and asked the agent and associate what they wanted to drink while scooping up a handful of ice from the ice bin in front of him, shaking all but one piece of ice out of his hand, and placing the ice in his mouth.  The agent and associate asked for a minute to think and Xxxxx rudely turned his back without any recognition or smile.

This is a 2-part AZ Health Code issue, as first Xxxxx placed his bare hands into the sanitized ice, and then touched his mouth with his hands and the product and then put his hands back into the ice bin without washing.

Xxxxx spoke to one of the customers sitting at the bar, eating a few more pieces of ice while talking to the patron, and then proceeded to stand in front of the register texting on his phone.  The agent and associate waited three minutes while Xxxxx was texting, at no point did he stop and look around at his customers to see if service was needed, and finally turned around saying “sorry about that.  Do you know what you want yet?”  The agent and associate placed a drink order (see food and beverage summary for details).

Xxxxx placed beverage napkins in front of the agent and associate and quickly served the beverages.  Xxxxx asked if the agent and associate would like to pay cash, a credit card was provided to start a tab, which Xxxxx swiped into the POS system after placing the drinks into the system, and placed the credit card into a box of cards.

Xxxxx never asked for proper identification. Agent's associate is well under the age of 30. This is a dram shop liquor liability issue that should be addressed by management.

At no point did Xxxxx attempt to strike up a conversation with the agent or associate and only asked if an additional drink was desired once throughout the entire evaluation.

He was noted to continuously grab fistfuls of ice from the ice bins, dropping all but one chip of ice back into the bin, and eating the single remaining chip while talking to customers.  Xxxxx was also observed using his bare hands, instead of tongs, to place and squeeze fruit and garnish into drinks, as well as use a dirty mixing tin to scoop ice into clean glassware, if he was not scooping the glassware directly into the ice bin.  Xxxxx was also noted to be frequently texting behind the bar throughout the evaluation.

Bartender 2 arrived behind the bar at approximately 9:54 pm.  She greeted various customers, showing off the teddy bear tied to her back and explaining to various customers that they were having a pajama party.  Bartender 2 was not observed texting behind the bar, nor having any integrity issues, but was stationed on the opposite side of the bar from where the agent and associate were sitting.

Bartender 3 arrived at approximately 10:07 pm, smiling to customers as she entered behind the bar.  Based on overheard conversations it became apparent that Bartender 3 was a customer or mutual friend of many patrons and was training to bartend at the establishment as a new hire.  Throughout the evaluation she was also polite and friendly with customers, but was minimally observed as she was being trained by Bartender 2 and stayed with her on the opposite side of the bar.

Bartender 4 arrived at approximately 10:10 pm, immediately checking in and chatting with the first three bartenders as well as the bar-back.

At 10:20pm he was noted to make a phone call behind the bar, which lasted approximately two minutes.  After the call he scanned the bar and began serving and associating with patrons.

Bartender 5 arrived shortly after Bartender 4, at approximately 10:17 pm.  Bartender 5 also checked in and chatted with the other staff members briefly, then waved and greeted many of the patrons who, at this point, were filling the bar.

When the agent and associate were ready to close the tab it took approximately ten minutes to catch the attention of one of the bartenders, all of whom were extremely busy by this time serving the high volume of customers.

Bartender 4 noticed the agent and associate’s need of service and yelled over the music “how can I help you”.  The agent gestured a desire to close their tab.  Bartender yelled again over the music inquiring about the last name on the tab, which the agent provided.  The tab was provided in a clean check presenter, signed, and returned.

Due to having multiple drinks spilled on the agent and associate, the remainder of the evaluation was completed away from the bar-top and in the crowd.

Multiple left issues were observed during this evaluation:

At 10:27 pm Xxxxx was observed ducking his head into the corner of the bar and quickly drinking a mixed shot through a straw.  He stood, scrunching his face in response to the strength of the liquor in the drink, emptied the remaining ice and straw into the trash, and continued to work.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

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

The alcohol also was not registered into the POS or any comp/spill sheet; therefore, Agent scores this as an integrity/theft issue. Consuming alcohol while on duty is also a dram shop liquor liability issue. Should an unfortunate incident happen, or an act of violence occur that results in litigation, Xxxxx's impairment can cause disastrous results for the owners.

At 10:30 pm Xxxxx was observed serving three shots of rumplemintz poured into rocks glasses without a jigger and as 1.5 ounce shots and then served the shots to three gentlemen by the service well without charging for the shots or placing them on a comp tab in the POS system.

At 10:37 Xxxxx was observed making 15 mixed drink shots, initially mixed in two separate mixing tins and distributed into 15 rocks glasses, then stacked the glasses in three piles and handed them over the bar to a gentlemen with guests sitting at one of the booths.  Xxxxx did not charge for the shots, nor put the shots into the POS system, but did take money from the gentlemen and agent observed him to put it directly into the tip cup.

At 10:39 Bartender 5 was observed making 6 shots, initially mixed in a mixing tin and poured evenly into rocks glasses, and handing them to a one girl over the bar without charging her or putting the drinks into the POS system at all.  This patron proceeded to carry the shots to the patio to serve to her friends.

This is also an ADLLC Violation.

 

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 10:46 Xxxxx was observed pouring 2 Don Julio shots without a jigger, as 1.5 ounce shots, and serving them to a patron who was previously served free drinks from the bar-back (see bar-back summary for details).  These drinks were not charged for nor entered into the POS system.

 

There was an additional integrity issue observed regarding the reputation of the bar rather than the staff:

In the beginning of the evaluation there were two female patrons sitting at the corner of the bar next to the agent and associate.  Each were initially dressed in regular clothes, however, as the bartenders changed in order to wear pajama party attire, one of the two patrons changed in the bathroom into a see-through, lace, tight, short dress, and extremely tall heels.  This change was previously known and strongly encouraged by all of the staff, clearing pointing out that it had been planned and discussed with the staff prior to the shift.  This patron sat at the bar in this outfit as well as a sports hat continuing to drink and dance to the music by waving her hands around her and aggressively nodding her head and body to the music.  

Later in the evening, when the servers came out with liquor bottles to free-pour into the patrons’ mouths, this patron was helped onto the bar by the bar-back and began aggressively dancing on the bar.  As she bounced up and down on the bar, continuing to wave her hands and arms around, her skirt continuously rode up her legs and above her rear end, exposing her rear as well as her purple thong.  Her see-through dress also obviously exposed her breasts and nipples to the crowd which is against the law.

This patron stayed on the bar, dancing, leaning down and dancing in front of and accepting tips from customers, and sexually and provocatively grinding up against a staff member dressed in a bear costume who was also on the bar.

TITLE 19, CHAPTER 1

R19-1-214. Sex Acts Prohibited, Real or Simulated

No licensee shall permit, on the licensed premises, any person to perform acts of or acts which constitute or simulate:

1. Sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation, or any sexual acts which are prohibited by law;

2. The touching, caressing, or fondling of the breast, buttocks, anus, or genitals;

3. The displaying of any portion of the areola of the female breast, or any portion of his or her pubic hair, anus, vulva, or genitals; or

To those patrons appearing concerned that the girl was going to knock over their drinks, and would move their drinks for her, she would lean over and yell “don’t worry.  I am a professional!”

Although some customers were initially entertained by this, most customers quickly shifted from smiling and laughing to shaking their heads at the spectacle on the bar.  On more than one occasion the patron danced in front of a group of girls, or guys, sitting at the bar, who proceeded to leave their seats and spots and move to a different section of the establishment to get away from the girl.

This was a behavior that appeared to be seen as distasteful and inappropriate by more than one patron as well as the agent and associate.  The agent feels that it is also important to note that a patron dancing on the bar, especially in that attire and platform heels, is an extreme safety as well as health and liability risk.

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: Free drinks, Intoxicated Security Employee Theft

September 6, 2012 21:39 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

My associate and took seats at the bar and were immediately greeted by a Caucasian Blonde female with tattoos on her xxx. She did not introduce herself but we later ascertained her name was Xxxxx. Xxxxx had a BIG smile in her greet of us and asked what we wanted to drink. Agent associate asked if there were any specials and she named a Kettle Orange Vodka as the special. Agent asked a few questions about items and Xxxxx showed good product knowledge. We placed an order and she went to go prepare it. She prepared our drinks quite differently. My associates drink got a 1 1/4 oz count pour where my drink was nearly a 6 count and almost double the alcohol. Agent did not order a double and was quite puzzled by the alcohol volume disparity. We started a tab with Xxxxx and she took the appropriate measures.

Xxxxx is very friendly and seems to fit into this bar like a glove. She's friendly with regulars as well as new guests as she strikes conversation and is very pleasant. She has good bartender presence for the most part and has good bartending prioritization skills.  The one hygiene issue of note was that she frequently scratches the scalp of her head and does not wash her hands afterwards.

However, she does have some bartending issues issue that need to be addressed. First, her pour counts are all over the place. They range anywhere from 1 1/4 oz to over 3 oz at times and there doesn't seem to be any rhyme/reason to it. The patterns that were picked up by the Agent were a 1 1/4 oz pours for the Kettle Orange that was on special. I even saw one under-poured with a single ounce shot. Agent saw this many times through the night. Women in general usually received a higher pour volume, as did those who apparently were tipping larger. With the later of these, this Agent scores this as a bartender theft occurrence as delivering additional alcohol over what is prescribed by management (1 1/4 oz pour) to increase gratuity and/or social status is a form of bartender theft.

Second, her ringing procedures are lackadaisical. This can be attributed to laziness and/or masking of integrity issues and bartender theft. Countless times throughout the evening there were drinks delivered with no movement made to the register to record them (see observations below).

Another rather important issue was some of the guests in the bar looked to be of questionable age and Xxxxx was serving them. It's of the agent's opinion that she probably felt that intoxicated Xxxxx had already carded them giving her a false sense of security. Bottom line is though she served these guest alcohol. Agent will add that I cannot substantiate the age of these guests; however, it was of my opinion they were of questionable age.

Xxxxx fell behind many times on clearing glassware and wiping the bar top down. Agent put her arm in a puddle of liquid and was not pleased about it, then exacerbated when I had to go to the unclean restroom to wash up. My associate commented that if security Xxxxx wasn't such a life of the party so to speak, he could have helped her maintain the bar better, as for the most part she did all the work.

Because Xxxxx was busy seemingly running the entire bar, the facility didn't seem to be running at it's best efficiency level. If Xxxxx had a security member who didn't disappear and helped her frequently, the bar would have run much smoother and a bi-product of this would have been more sales revenue.

Xxxxx was at about a 90% clip in using cocktail cards with guests. Drinks were ordered and served in a timely manner except for some occasions when she got busy.

Xxxxx scoops ice with glassware. This is just wrong and a very bad habit that should be broken right away. It's very unsanitary and a cause for health concerns, and possible injury due to broken glass.

Specific observations:

As aforementioned, Xxxxx had a propensity to not ruing drinks. This makes it very cumbersome to substantiate bartender theft occurrences accurately. This agent suggests that management make some immediate policy changes and create a make a drink - ring a drink policy and enforce it. This will force accountability.

At 9:39 she prepared a drink with a 5 count of alcohol and did not move to record the drink.

At 9:43 she prepared 3 shots of whiskey and did not move to record the drinks.  Age observed her move to POS 2 min later and this could have been the ring in.

At 9:47 she delivered 1 yellow and 3 brown beers to a female patron and did not move to record. This woman looked of questionable age. At 10:00 it appeared she delay rang these beers.

At 9:48 Agent observed the bartender has a personal drink behind the bar. Agent cannot ascertain the contents.

9:45 Agent's drink is dry and she is not asked for a refill until 8 minutes later.

At 9:55 Agent observed Xxxxx counting money from a wood box next to cig display. Agent would stress to management that NO money should be handled outside of the POS drawer and legitimate transactions. This makes a rather ripe situation for bartender theft when this is allowable.

At 9:58 3 shots (Jameson?) were delivered to customers and no movement to record the drinks. One consumed my Security Xxxxx.

At approximately 10:01 Security Xxxxx took money out of tip jar and then gave it to a customer, who then appeared to give it to Xxxxx and then she put it back into tip jar. It was a very bizarre occurrence to observe and highly suspicious in nature. Age could not verify exactly the nature of what happened but suspects maybe the money hand changing round robin was a lame effort to satisfy a security camera. That is just an hypothesis. Regardless, the alcohol went unaccounted for.

At 10:06 Xxxxx under pours a guest a Kettle orange with less than an ounce of alcohol.

At 10:10  3 shots were delivered and no movement to record the drinks. Xxxxx also drank a shot with the guests but it appeared to be in a different sort of glass than the others.

At 10:15 agent observed Xxxxx make a drink with a 4 count of alcohol into a short glass, then the customer exclaimed that she wanted it tall and Xxxxx poured the drink into a pint and then added another ounce of alcohol. She was not observed accounting for the drink at that time.

Xxxxx asked and prepared a drink for my associate, but for some odd reason did not ask me for one. Agent started to suspect that she may be impaired of some sorts, as I also observed her making other simple mistakes such as delivering drinks to the wrong guest after making them. this happened a few times.

Several minutes later she asked me if I wanted another drink and went to prepare it, She made my drink with a 4 count 1 1/2 oz pour and did not report to the POS to record it on my tab.

At 10:26 Xxxxx appeared "distracted" delivering drink to wrong person the corrected herself. She did not report to the POS to record the drink.

At 10:29 Xxxxx almost gave change to wrong patron.

At 10:33 my associate ordered a drink and she prepared it with a 6 count of alcohol. This time she DID report immediately to the POS.

At 10:36 My associate reported that it appeared Xxxxx was drinking a beer. At 10:43 A male patron at the bar Gave Xxxxx another shot of alcohol.

At 10:44 Xxxxx made a cocktail and did not report to the POS.

At 10:50 Xxxxx is observed going to the POS and group ringing sales all at once. It appeared as if she was looking around at guest sand drawing from a mental inventory in order to try and correctly ascertain all the alcohol drinks she had delivered for tabs.

At 10:56 Xxxxx prepared 2 cocktails for a man and a woman at the bar. One was poured with a 5 count and the other was poured with a 6 count. This really exemplified the inconsistent pours of this bartender.

At 10:58 Bartender was observed coming out from bar and collecting glassware. Doorman Xxxxx nowhere to be seen. She was also later observed wiping the tables.

At 11:11 Xxxxx was observed delivering 2 drinks and a beer and not observed reporting to the POS to record.

At 11:12 Xxxxx made 2 bombers of some sort and not observed reporting to the POs to record.

At 11:17 she was observed making a cocktail for one guest and not ringing it in and then moving to another guest an deserving him a Corona and not ringing it in either.

At 11:23 is observed going to the POS and group ringing sales all at once. It appeared as if she was looking around at guest sand drawing from a mental inventory in order to try and correctly ascertain all the alcohol drinks she had delivered for tabs.

At 11:26 Agent was a bit distracted by something that happened near the pool table. When I turned around the POS screen had "No Sale" and Xxxxx was counting money in the wood drawer. Agent cannot substantiate what happened.

At around 11:35 Xxxxx gave two shots to customers who looked as if they had already tabbed out. One of the customers tried to pay and appeared she shook it off in a "don't worry about it" fashion. The shots were not seen accounted for.

11:40 Security Xxxxx doing another shot of alcohol.

Tab procedures were carried out in a timely manner. No itemized receipt  was given.

Security Summary

Upon arrival, security Xxxxx was at the front entrance and asked us for ID's. I pulled my wallet from my purse and showed it to him and he mumbled something inaudible and I said "what?" and he leaned in to ask me again and that is when I was ht with a wall alcohol smelling bad breath.  I showed him my ID again and took a step back and took note that he had a  goofy look on his face and glassy eyes. His level of alcohol impairment was absurd. As we passed, he yelled something at my associate and gave him a fist bump. My associate then said to me, "Is that Door Guy totally wasted or what?"

The professionalism of this guy was way out of line. He also appeared to do next to nothing to help out with Xxxxx. His numerous disappearances left the door unattended and people just walking in without properly showing ID. many of the disappearances were associated with a young Caucasian female with red hair.

At one point he stumbled through the bar in an attempt to hug some guy spilling drinks and bumping into other guests.

This employee is a liquor liability dram shop lawsuit waiting to happen.

He did not greet us farewell upon our departure.                                                           

Beverage Summary

DO NOT POST THIS SECTION TO STAFF

SPOTTER ANONYMITY WILL BE COMPROMISED

My associate ordered one of the Kettle Orange drinks and it was awful and it was sent back. He then ordered Knob Creek and Coke and the drinks were inconsistent with taste because each one was made with different volumes of alcohol.

Agent had Malibu and Diet drinks and it was the same issue with inconsistent tastes because of fluctuating liquor volumes.

The two shots listed at the end of the bar section were for me and my associate. We tabbed out and purposely tipped Xxxxx rather large and as an integrity test pre-text, said "let's order a shot before we go" She delivered the shots and said they were free.

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: Free drinks and shots for friends

May 9, 2012 17:00 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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


BARTENDER THEFT: Not ringing drinks in right away, over-pouring.

May 9, 2012 16:29 by administrator

BARTENDER THEFT:

Bartender Summary

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

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

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

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


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

Neither bartender offered their name to the agent.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


BARTENDER THEFT - Bartender 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