BARTENDER THEFT: Strip Club Cabaret, Bar Theft, Liquor Law Violations, Intoxicated Employees
Facility Summary
When the agent and associate approached the facility from Xxxxx, the agent and associate wondered for a moment if the facility was even open. The front doors were closed, there were no items in the front area of the facility to imply it was open, such as a space heater or sign, and although there were few cars in the front and back the facility, overall, it appeared empty and quite.
Through the front doors of the establishment, the host area was dark and vacant as well. The small desk area had a basket of mints. To the left of the host desk, a doorway opened up to the main room.
A bar ran along the front left corner of the establishment. Several stools lined the outside of the bar allowing for patron seating. There were two POS monitors on either side of the bar, the right of which was being used during the evaluation. The back area of the bar was messy and full of personal items (Please see Bartender Summary for details).
Along the left wall was an ATM machine, and the restrooms were located in the back left corner of the facility. No restroom attendant occupied either restroom; however, both restrooms were clean, neat, and fully stocked with paper products and soap.
The DJ booth was located in the left back corner of the facility as well, with a cut-out window at the top of the booth to allow the DJ to look out to the stage and crowd. Throughout the evaluation, the DJ played a variety of upbeat rock, R&B, and pop music. The music was played at a comfortable and appropriate level.
The DJ himself was barely audible, however. His statements sounded very garbled and unintelligible based on the fluctuations in pitch in his “DJ voice” and lack of volume of the microphone. In addition, a serious integrity issue was observed that was performed by the DJ (Please see Bartender Summary for details).
To the right of the DJ booth and extending from the right back corner of the room was a large VIP area that was separated by large, red, sheer drapes hanging from the ceiling. In addition, a small VIP area was located in the front right corner of the facility with the same red, sheer drapes creating the walls of the room. In between the two VIP areas and along the right wall was a line of lap dance chairs facing the crowd. Behind the chairs was a chair-to-ceiling mirror.
In the center of the room toward the back half of the room was a large rectangular stage with a spinning pole in the center. The stage was raised on a high platform. Along the sides of the stage were rectangular VIP tables with “reserved” tents and long bottle service menus standing upright.
A small, circular second stage was located in the front of the room toward the bar. This stage was low to the ground and surrounded by a padded circular shelf with cup holders built into the base. This stage was not used during the evaluation.
In between the front of the main stage and the second stage, several small tables were available for additional seating. Each table had three chairs pushed in and facing the stage.
Overall the facility was relatively well maintained and appeared to have been barely touched after the clean up and organization from the night before. Based on the exterior appearance of the facility, however, there was nothing welcoming about the facility nor anything that the agent felt would entice passing vehicles to stop by.
Bartender Summary
· Bartender 1: Receipt read “Xxxxx”; Caucasian female, approximately 5’5” tall, thin build, with long brown hair, wearing a dark grey “Xxxxx’s” t-shirt, black leggings, and black sneakers.
The agent and associate walked into the bar and stood waiting for their eyes to adjust. The agent and associate were approached by Bartender 1, who had come out from behind the bar, and told the agent and associate they could sit wherever they pleased and she would come to them to serve them. The agent and associate took a seat at one of the tables and Bartender 1 walked over to the agent and associate.
Bartender 1 asked us what we would like to drink, and the agent and associate placed drink orders (Please see Food and Beverage Summary for details). Bartender 1 repeated the order for confirmation and left to pour and retrieve the beverages.
Bartender 1 returned, placing the beverages in front of the agent and associate without beverage napkins. Bartender 1 stated the price of the beverages. The agent provided a credit card, and Bartender 1 asked if the agent would like to open or close the tab. The agent stated that they wanted to open a tab and Bartender 1 asked the agent for an ID in order to hold the card.
Bartender 1 did not ID the associate at all, and although Bartender 1 did take the agent’s ID she did not look at it prior to serving the agent and associate liquor. Furthermore, she did not appear to be concerned with the age of the agent at all, but instead took the ID solely to hold the card. The agent feels that a cash payment would have prevented Bartender 1 from viewing the agent’s ID entirely. Neither the agent nor the associate were over 35 and, therefore, should have been ID’d.
Bartender 1 took the card and ID and walked away. At no point during the evaluation did Bartender 1 formally introduce herself or give the agent and associate her name.
While seated at the table, the agent noted that Bartender 1 decided to sit on the outside of the bar, next to a customer with whom she had been and would be flirting throughout the evaluation. This patron was a tall African American man with dread locks and a beard, wearing a long-sleeved shirt, sweat pants, and flip flops with socks. The bartender took a position on the opposite side of the bar at 4:30pm and she returned to this position periodically throughout the evaluation.
Later in the evaluation, the agent and associate approached the bar to order an additional beverage (Please see Food and Beverage summary for details). Bartender 1 immediately asked if the agent wanted to close the tab. The agent was surprised, feeling that a more appropriate promotional response would be to ask if the agent wanted another beverage instead of bringing attention to the idea of leaving the establishment. Instead, an additional beverage was ordered.
Although Bartender 1 quickly provided the associate the beverage, Bartender 1 neglected to place this beverage on the tab and, therefore, the beverage was never paid for. The agent is sure this was not an unspoken comp’d beverage but, instead, an error of neglect on Bartender 1’s part.
This beverage was served with a beverage napkin.
The agent noted that the back bar area was covered with Bartender 1’s personal bags and possibly some of the DJ’s items. The agent noted a purse by the register, a large over-sized bag in the center of the back bar area, and a laptop computer bag next to the large bag.
The agent also observed several integrity issues:
At 4:54pm while Bartender 1 was sitting at the bar next to the customer with whom she was flirting, the DJ walked behind the bar and poured three mixed shots, distributing one to Bartender 1, one to the patron with whom she was sitting, and keeping one for himself. The patron, the DJ, and Bartender 1 took the shots. None of the beverages were paid for or accounted for on a comp tab. The agent noted that the DJ and Bartender 1 behaved as if this was common practice. ths is also an ADLLC Violation.
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.
At 5:15pm Bartender 1 served herself and the patron with whom she was flirting two large shots of straight Peach Ciroc. Neither of these shots was paid for nor accounted for on a comp tab.
Bartender 1 was noted to almost immediately pick up her cell phone and text as soon as the patron with whom she was flirting walked away to use the restroom or make a call outside.
While talking to the patron with whom she was flirting, Bartender 1 complained several times that she was “so bored”.
Bartender 1 and the patron were also overheard several times making fun of Xxxxx, making statements such as “crack kills” and “gotta love heroin”. The agent feels that not only should staff never make fun of other staff as it portrays a negative impression of the establishment, but, more importantly, if Bartender 1 was obviously aware of Xxxxx’s state of intoxication, it is Bartender 1’s responsibility to cut her off and ensure she leaves the property within the allotted and legally required amount of time.
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, “obviously intoxicated” means inebriated to the extent that a person’s physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.
Overall, the agent felt that Bartender 1 completely neglected almost all aspects of her job and its responsibilities. As a regular patron, the agent would hope that Bartender 1 was not working if the agent ever decided to return.
Dancer Summary
Dancer 1: Possibly Named Xxxxx; African American female, approximately 5’6” tall, thin build, with black hair worn up in a side bun, wearing a black bra, a green lace thong, and black boots.
Dancer 2: Caucasian female, approximately 5’5” tall, medium build, with long brown hair, wearing a matching green and black thong and bra, and black heels.
Dancer 3: Named Xxxxx; Caucasian female, approximately 5’7” tall, thin build, with blonde hair worn up in xxxxxxxxxx up-do, wearing a black bra, black ruffled underwear, black thigh highs, and clear heels.
Dancer 4: Caucasian female, approximately 5’4” tall, medium build, with blonde hair, wearing a white thong white bra, white heels, and a knee brace.
Throughout the evaluation there were only four dancers working; however, at no point during the evaluation were all four dancers out on the floor at the same time. Although there were few dancers on shift to begin with, only having two or three out on the floor at a time caused the establishment to be even less appealing.
Overall the dancers were not very friendly or welcoming.
Dancer 2 was observed either off of the floor in the back area or sitting by herself against the right wall in a lap dance chair, watching TV and pouting. She was not observed talking to any customers or employees and sat with her arms and legs crossed watching TV. When she was called onstage to perform her set, she did so with minimal enthusiasm and appeared entirely bored.
Dancer 4 was initially observed talking to customers at the bar when the evaluation began. She performed an enthusiastic set, doing pole tricks and flirting with the few customers in the establishment. She did not approach the agent and associate however.
Dancer 1 performed her set enthusiastically as well, doing several pole tricks and dancing around the stage for the few patrons seated at the bar. Dancer 1 was observed exiting the VIP area in the beginning of the evaluation, having just performed a dance, however was not observed talking to any other patrons thereafter and did not approach the agent and associate.
The only dancer that did approach the agent and associate, as well as every other patron in the establishment, was Dancer 3, Xxxxx. Dancer 3, however, was clearly intoxicated. Her movements on stage and her physical appearance, including the appearance of her pupils caused the agent to believe Xxxxx was extremely high and possibly drunk as well.
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, “obviously intoxicated” means inebriated to the extent that a person’s physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.
When Xxxxx finished her set on stage she was observed approaching the bar and ordered a gin and tonic. Xxxxx walked from the bar with the freshly poured beverage and came directly to the agent and associate who were seated at a table. Xxxxx introduced herself and unknowingly spilled her beverage all over the associate’s lap. Xxxxx was slurring her words terribly and barely stood up straight. The agent was shocked that she was working in such a condition.
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, “obviously intoxicated” means inebriated to the extent that a person’s physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.
Xxxxx asked the agent and associate if they were interested in a dance, which they declined. Xxxxx then spent much of the evaluation in the DJ booth with the DJ and in the back room.
The agent did not observe the dancers perform any lap dances.
In addition, there were periods of ten minutes and longer that no dancer was on stage at all.
Overall, the agent and associate were very disappointed with the lack of friendliness of the dancers and the sloppy presentation of Xxxxx. The agent feels that if this is what most day shifts look like, in regard to how many dancers work and how they behave, it is no surprise the establishment was extremely quiet.
Security Summary
There was no Security working during this evaluation.
Food and Beverage Summary
Spotter Notes:
While seated at the bar, the agent and associate struck up a conversation with Bartender 1 twice. At this point the agent, associate, and a male African American patron with whom Bartender 1 was flirting were the only three customers in the establishment.
The agent feels that part of the customer loss was due to the fact that the dancers did not pay the customers much attention and that Bartender 1 was paying all of her attention to the one customer.
When talking to Bartender 1, the third patron was in the bathroom. As soon as the patron returned, Bartender 1 walked away from the agent and associate, in the middle of the agent asking a question.
The second conversation occurred while the third patron was outside on the phone. Again, when the third patron returned, Bartender 1 abruptly stopped talking to the agent and associate and returned to paying all of her attention to the third customer.
During the first conversation, the agent asked about the level of business at that time (which was three customers). Bartender 1 stated that the nights were busy at the establishment but “the days suck”.
Bartender 1 continued to state that that particular day was the busiest day the establishment had had in a long time. Bartender 1 was referring to the six customers that were in the establishment at the beginning of the evaluation. As a regular patron, this description would cause the agent to believe the establishment was never upbeat and lively during the day and would choose to go elsewhere during the day.
In addition, Bartender 1 stated that Hi Liter has the best strip club day shift. Bartender 1 spent several minutes stating that it was a great day shift with food and happy hour drink specials. The agent felt that this was a very inappropriate conversation due to the fact that it was promoting a competing establishment and putting down Xxxxx’s Cabaret.
For the first round of beverages, the agent ordered a Red Bull/vodka, which Bartender 1 did not try to up-sell. Bartender 1 did, however, pour the beverage with accurate pour counts and provided a beverage that was consistent and accurate in flavor.
For his first and second beverage, the associate ordered Coronas. Both Coronas were fresh and cold.
Reserved VIP Tables:
The agent asked Bartender 1 about the reserved tables by the stage. Each table had a large “Reserved” tent on the table as well as an upright bottle service menu. Bartender 1 explained that these tables were said to be reserved in case a large party came into the establishment and wanted to order bottle service. Bartender 1 stated that the “reserved” sign enabled the staff to ask those patrons who did not order bottle service to move.
Bartender 1 stated that these tables did not cost extra due to the cost of the bottle service.
Drink Tickets:
Bartender 1 was not able to clearly explain the drink tickets, however, did provide a few for the agent. Bartender 1 explained that the staff gave away the tickets to the patrons.
The patrons were required to pay the $10 cover at the door and then were able to use the drink tickets. The agent asked several questions but did not get further clarification.
The tickets were given to the agent as if they could be used at another date, however, the tickets state that they are to be used the same day they are acquired and each ticket is dated, which would imply they are useless and have already been used.
Cab Drivers:
Bartender 1 made a comment about the amount of cab drivers that come into the establishment during the day shifts. Bartender 1 then explained that they come in because all cab drivers are given kickbacks from the gentlemen’s clubs in the area. Bartender 1 explained that the cab drivers get $5 per patron they bring to the establishment when those patrons do not pay cover. When those patrons do pay cover, the cab drivers receive the entire $10 cover charge per patron.
Michael Zenner – CEO
Hospitality Checkpoint LLC
bartheft.com (blog)
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-1919
Toll Free: 800-880-0811
© Hospitality Checkpoint LLC 2014
One thought on “Bartender Theft, Liquor Liabilty Issues, Dram Shop Issues”
Comments are closed.