Bartender Summary
- Bartender 1 – Xxxxx: Tall Caucasian male with dark brown long, spiky hair. He wore a black shirt and jeans.
- Bartender 2: Caucasian male with longer shaggy blonde hair. He wore a black shirt and jeans.
- Bartender 3: Tan skinned (possibly Mediterranean or Hispanic) male with dark brown, short spiky hair and short facial hair around the chin. He wore a black shirt, partially opened in the front, with a necklace.
- Bartender 4: Tan skinned (possibly Mediterranean or Hispanic) male with short spiky brown hair. He wore a black shirt and jeans.
- Bartender 5: Caucasian female with tan skin and dark brown hair pulled back in a ponytail. She wore a black skirt and top.
The agent and associate approached the bar and were greeted by Xxxxx. Xxxxx offered the agent and associate a beverage and took the order. Before preparing the beverages or entering the order into the POS, Xxxxx took another order from a customer standing a few feet over, and prepared the beverages all at once – grouping the drink orders together. Upon delivery, he quoted each party a price. The agent presented a credit card and Xxxxx took the card to hold the tab.
The agent would suggest that management highly discourage grouping orders as such, as beverages can be mistakenly forgotten or this process can effectively be used to mask bartender theft issues.
Xxxxx worked quickly as a bartender, but frequently grouped his orders. Because of this “grouping” of orders, Agent cannot fully substantiate theft/integrity issues with this individual process; however, it is highly likely and very much suspected.
His pouring style was consistent, as he used a 4 count pour (4 count = 1 ½ oz) for virtually all beverages observed.
Xxxxx did not attempt to upsell on liquor when the opportunity presented itself, consistently deferring to the house brands for mixed beverages.
Furthermore, Xxxxx was not diligent about entering beverage orders into the POS following service.
At approximately 11:53 pm, Xxxxx was observed serving a beverage to a customer and did not ring an order into the POS at that time. Agent classifies this as a theft occurrence.
This was not uncommon amongst the bartenders. Nor were other types of misconduct.
At approximately 11:45 pm, Bartender 2 was observed pouring a 6 count of liquor into a beverage. The agent could not confirm whether the beverage was charged as a double.
At approximately 11:49 pm, Bartender 4 served a customer and did not enter the order into the POS.
At approximately 12:02 pm, Bartender 3 was observed giving two females a hug across the bar. He then served them two free shots and did not charge them.
The same bartender later followed up with two additional shots at 12:04. Again, he did not charge either for the shots.
In addition to serving beverages for which were unaccounted, the bartenders also were observed serving themselves alcohol.
Shortly after the two females were served free shots, Bartender 2 was observed quickly pouring himself a portion from one of the clear liquor bottles and quickly drinking it himself. This is an ADLLC violation. The liquor was also not accounted for and therefore a theft issue as well.
ADLLC VIOLATION
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.
Later, at approximately 12:24 am, Bartender 3 was observed pouring a beverage for a customer. He surreptitiously placed an empty rocks glass next to the concoction and poured a long pull of about two full finger lengths of straight vodka before putting the bottle away. He then proceeded to hide the glass behind the shaker set up, apparently so that customers could not directly see the glass of alcohol, and left it there as he served the original concoction to the customer.
Some time later, he conveniently came back to retrieve the glass, apparently thinking that sufficient time had elapsed and the drink therefore would not be suspected by guests of being liquor, and brought it to the opposite side of the bar. The agent was unable to observe what became of the vodka as he was conveniently obscured, but Bartender 3 was undoubtedly hiding the drink from onlookers, as it was poured discreetly and carefully hidden. This liquor was not accounted for and therefore is also considered a theft occurrence.
ADLLC VIOLATION
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.
At approximately 12:45 am, Bartender 4 was observed serving a customer and did not enter an order into the POS.
At nearly the same time, Bartender 3 was again seen delivering free shots, without charging.
The agent had difficulty observing Bartender 5 due to the positioning of the crowd and the structure of the room. She appeared to be pouring beverages consistently, and no integrity issues were noted; however, it is necessary to point out that this evaluation was based on limited exposure.
The agent also observed Bartender 4 constantly checking his cell phone, which he kept hidden on the back bar near the VIP ledge.
Overall, the conduct of the bartenders during this observation was rather unprofessional and irresponsible. The agent observed free beverages being given away, grouped orders, and over-pouring. Furthermore, the agent observed at least one bartender consuming alcohol, and another that at the very least intended to. Irresponsible liquor service and a lack of diligent work ethic is an easy way put a liquor license in jeopardy.
The presumable MOD, a short Mediterranean male dressed in a suit, spent most of his time observing from the steps to the VIP section. He was observed behind the bar on several occasions, giving the bartender hugs and fraternizing. The agent found it surprising that he would not catch on to what was occurring.
When the agent was ready for the check, Xxxxx promptly presented an itemized copy of the receipt along with the agent’s card. The receipt was relatively correct, although there was one possible manipulation (see the Beverage Addendum).
Addendum
The agent decided to order a double gin and tonic to test the bartenders pouring skills. Xxxxx poured the beverage using about a 7 count pour. The beverage was stiff, and appropriately balanced for a double. On the itemized copy of the receipt, the agent was shockingly only charged a single dollar for the double, as it appeared on the bill as “$$ rocks.” Again, Agent found this highly surprising to have 1 nearly 1 ¼ oz of liquor for a dollar. The agent does not know the establishment’s policy on double drinks, but would assume that a double would be twice the price, or at least more than $1.
BARTENDER THEFT:
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811
© hospitality checkpoints Inc. 2010