Heads up, all Ca. food servers.

[Deleted]

Is the test offered in Spanish?

[cme1201]

Jun 20, 2011 8:32:26 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Is the test offered in Spanish?

It's California do you even need to ask this question?!?

[Deleted]

Jun 20, 2011 8:36:30 GMT -5 cme1201 said:

Jun 20, 2011 8:32:26 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Is the test offered in Spanish?

It's California do you even need to ask this question?!?

The only bad question is the question not asked.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...hmm... this means I can sue the state and not just the restaurant when I get injured via food handling, right?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Having been in the restaurant industry myself, and having several friends who do catering and who own restaurants-- I saw this trend coming. And got out ahead of it-- having a lovely spouse in the "e-learning" business. She and her cohorts now write a lot of restaurant industry courses (and do a lot of Celiacs Disease, vegan, vegitarian, and "green" industry courses...). Thanks, big government!

[verrip1]

Jun 20, 2011 8:46:01 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...hmm... this means I can sue the state and not just the restaurant when I get injured via food handling, right?

Ya! Ever try to prove that restaurant food caused you to be sick? Lotsa luck on that. There's always the issue of evidence, and, after all, your body pretty much destroys all evidenciary value no matter which end it comes out. Kept a to-go bag? How you going to keep it fresh and sterile until the court date?

[chiver78]

Jun 20, 2011 8:50:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Having been in the restaurant industry myself, and having several friends who do catering and who own restaurants-- I saw this trend coming. And got out ahead of it-- having a lovely spouse in the "e-learning" business. She and her cohorts now write a lot of restaurant industry courses (and do a lot of Celiacs Disease, vegan, vegitarian, and "green" industry courses...). Thanks, big government!

as someone with a life-threatening food allergy, I don't think that educating food handlers is a bad thing. I am quite vigilant about pointing out to my server that I do have an allergy, and really at that point I am relying on the kitchen to know what they are doing in order to not cross-contaminate my meal.

that said, I don't see how this program will be all that effective, if it is conducted the way it's described here. as someone else said - those managers will get very good at flying through the tests for their employees.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jun 20, 2011 9:29:57 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

Jun 20, 2011 8:46:01 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...hmm... this means I can sue the state and not just the restaurant when I get injured via food handling, right?

Ya! Ever try to prove that restaurant food caused you to be sick? Lotsa luck on that. There's always the issue of evidence, and, after all, your body pretty much destroys all evidenciary value no matter which end it comes out. Kept a to-go bag? How you going to keep it fresh and sterile until the court date?

...bodily fluids or other foreign objects in the food may be easier to "prove" at a later date than you think... let alone the poor schmuck who gives me my hot beverage in a plain styrofoam cup because they ran out of the "specially marked with a warning" ones...

[chiver78]

Jun 20, 2011 9:44:17 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

The problem I see is that even though the employees have been through the course and are suppose to know how to handle food, this doesn't guarantee that they will be safe and from what I've seen, too many could care less.

I absolutely agree with this.

Jun 20, 2011 9:44:17 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Now, if someone gets sick, from poor food handling, who is held responsible...the business owner, the employee, having had the course, or the government?

I'd think that would be the business owner. the employee would have to take the course as a condition of employment, but ultimately the business owner is responsible for hiring employees that will follow all appropriate laws and proper guidelines for standard procedures.

I compare it to my company, for example. I work for a pharmaceutical company. we have to follow cGMPs throughout the production of our meds. cGMPs are current Good Manufacturing Practices - not law, but industry-approved guidelines. if we don't, the FDA can shut us down. in extreme cases, the CEO can be fined or even jailed. yes, the employees need to follow the rules, but ultimately the boss's neck (and wallet) are on the line.

[ugonow]

I don't see anything wrong with it.It is a states right to implement any food saftey regs they want.Don't like it, set up shop elsewhere.Mexico has very few regs on this sort of thing. Grocery stores usually send food handlers through training,but it is not mandated on a state level. States have different regs on this, so it would make sence to attempt to train food handlers on a state level as to what the rules are. Even insurance claims workers have to be trained and licenced for every state they have jurastiction in because states have the right to set their own regs. JMO

[fairlycrazy23]

I'm surprised this wasn't already in place, maybe it is on the county or city level and now the state wants in on it, hopefully if it is in place at the county or city level, that requirement will be removed once the State requirement is in place.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I frankly don't see the need. If a restaurant poisons its customers- it goes out of business. It's just that simple. This assumption that were it not for government, restaurants wouldn't be sanitary- or that they don't care- is absurd.

[fairlycrazy23]

Jun 20, 2011 10:28:18 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I frankly don't see the need. If a restaurant poisons its customers- it goes out of business. It's just that simple. This assumption that were it not for government, restaurants wouldn't be sanitary- or that they don't care- is absurd.

Most state/local licensing is not really in the consumers best interest, it is mostly for raising revenue and controlling competition.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 20, 2011 10:41:28 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

Jun 20, 2011 10:28:18 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I frankly don't see the need. If a restaurant poisons its customers- it goes out of business. It's just that simple. This assumption that were it not for government, restaurants wouldn't be sanitary- or that they don't care- is absurd.

Most state/local licensing is not really in the consumers best interest, it is mostly for raising revenue and controlling competition.

That's EXACTLY what it is. This idea that "big business" lobbies for "deregulation" is absurd. They LOVE it. It's a way of raising costs for their competition-- it's a way of handing their competition obstacles and red tape. Fixing prices, monopolizing the market, colluding with big government. The big boys love them some Wesley Mooch.

[Sammy]

;D Apparently many of you never had occasion to peek in on your local restaurant's kitchen..... Ever suffer food poisoning? You may think it's ok to serve whipped cream in 90 degree weather, but it isn't and dangerous to the health of the consumer. Taking the course educates you on how to handle food.

Our state requires a Serve Safe Certificate for restaurants, food handlers, etc. The test is given by private contractors licensed by the state to administer the test and the certificate is good for 4 years.

Check out a Serve Safe test and see if you can answer the questions. It's far better to be safe than sorry.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jun 20, 2011 18:50:09 GMT -5 Sammy said:

;D Apparently many of you never had occasion to peek in on your local restaurant's kitchen..... Ever suffer food poisoning? You may think it's ok to serve whipped cream in 90 degree weather, but it isn't and dangerous to the health of the consumer. Taking the course educates you on how to handle food.

Our state requires a Serve Safe Certificate for restaurants, food handlers, etc. The test is given by private contractors licensed by the state to administer the test and the certificate is good for 4 years.

Check out a Serve Safe test and see if you can answer the questions. It's far better to be safe than sorry.

...fair enough... having said that, I think it's unfair that the state is not also banning the sale of whipped cream in 90+degree weather... so until that happens, it's fairly hard not to take the need for this state safety certificate along with a grain of salt, you know?

[Deleted]

So, just a handling card.. no health exam, TB test, stuff like that? That concerns me more than the handling of the food, since most restaurants try to maintain standards so the health dept doesn't shut them down. I know a druggie that is in and out of shelters, and you can't stay in a shelter here without a health card... but you don't have to have one to work in a restaurant. I think THAT is weird, and a possible public safety hazard. Those you can get free at the health dept. THIS sounds like a bunch of BS.

Maybe if they would check for green cards...

[fairlycrazy23]

Jun 20, 2011 18:50:09 GMT -5 Sammy said:

;D Apparently many of you never had occasion to peek in on your local restaurant's kitchen..... Ever suffer food poisoning? You may think it's ok to serve whipped cream in 90 degree weather, but it isn't and dangerous to the health of the consumer. Taking the course educates you on how to handle food.

Our state requires a Serve Safe Certificate for restaurants, food handlers, etc. The test is given by private contractors licensed by the state to administer the test and the certificate is good for 4 years.

Check out a Serve Safe test and see if you can answer the questions. It's far better to be safe than sorry.

You seem to be taking contradictory positions, one you say peek into local restaurant kitchens, presumably because they are 'dirty or unsafe' yet you talk about your states requirements for a 'Serve Safe Certificate' , so as has been stated they are not really doing the job intended, the certificate just brings the illusion of safe food handling.

[cael]

I've seen a lot of different things in my job, and this sounds like a good thing overall but, waiters and waitresses are not as big a concern as the guy who puts your cooked meal on your plate without gloves after he used the bathroom and didn't wash his hands. We require at least one person in charge to have a servsafe certificate who works full-time - they need to train other employees to safely handle food when they aren't there. As lonewolf says, sometimes nothing will make people handle food safely. I'd love to see something like this come to MA and listen to all the bitching and moaning about it from the restaurant owners!

And, restaurant workers who are found to have a reportable infectious disease are excluded from working until cleared by a doctor, so there is some oversight from that end of things.

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

So ... do you need one of those cards to have a lemonade stand?

[Deleted]

cael-- since I read you are in the business-- do you think the tamale family people outside stores have any kind of permit or anything? I live in AZ, and they are everywhere.

[Deleted]

That's great, wolf, that the kids are doing well. So glad to hear a good story. Weird about the health inspector thing...

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Ya! Ever try to prove that restaurant food caused you to be sick?

Lotsa luck on that. There's always the issue of evidence, and, after all, your body pretty much destroys all evidenciary value no matter which end it comes out. Kept a to-go bag? How you going to keep it fresh and sterile until the court date?

Well, on the flipside- try explaining to a person that immediately associates nausia, vomiting, fever, etc. with the last thing they ate that the incubation period for food poisoning is 24 to 48 hours.

Try explaining it to an untrained member of a jury who was after all too stupid to get out of jury duty.

[cael]

Krickitt, those people selling tamales should be permitted to do it. Jesus, they could be making those things in their kitchens at home for all anyone knows if they aren't permitted and inspected my city is extremely tight on regulations concerning outdoor and mobile food, because we have millions of tourists coming and going during certain times of the year (my city's not huge, about 50k people). I know other places that aren't that stringent.

The health dept absolutely needs to know when a restaurant is bought by a new owner - the new owners may be making food in their kitchens at home for all we know, and may have zero clue about food safety. We've had new owners come in with nooooo clue about anything. It always makes me sad when any health inspector story anyone tells is a negative one - we actually have a great relationship with our establishments overall and many restaurant owners will go to bat for us when administration wants to cut us again or whatever. It also helps me personally that I'm nice, diplomatic and not a middle aged white man

Guess people are entitled to their opinions and all, but I think a lot of people would rather not get sick regularly at restaurants. We also deal with housing, septic, swimming water quality, trash problems, rodents, pools, school cafeterias, lead paint, oh right now recreational camps - you do want your kid's camp counsellors to not be sex offenders right?


::off soap box::