Restaurants/bars - post Covid-19

Hombre de Acero wrote:Street Food in a Auto Repair Garage on Chicago’s far West Side

I've seen a few other examples,

G Wiv wrote:I've seen a few other examples . . .

at chicagotribune.com, Steve Chapman wrote:When the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down the governor’s stay-at-home order, several bars and restaurants immediately reopened, and customers came. At some, patrons thronged in, shunning masks and social distancing. On the following weekend, the resort town of Lake Geneva attracted a horde of tourists eager to eat, drink and mingle with others.

The implication was clear: Americans are tired of isolation and are unafraid of getting sick. If we lift the restrictions that have shut down so many of these places, people will go back to doing what they used to do.

But will they? I doubt it. The images from Wisconsin don’t give a reliable picture of what life will be like once establishments can welcome customers back inside.

It’s not surprising that those who resent the stay-at-home order would rush out to celebrate its end. It’s not surprising that Lake Geneva would get carloads of visitors who have spent past weekends there. But a burst of business from pent-up demand is not likely to last. A relatively small group of devil-may-care types won’t show up every night or at every place that reopens.

I had a restaurant reservation the weekend of March 14-15, before a single state had shut down. But everyone in our party of four agreed that the hazards of dining out were too much to justify. So we stayed away. So did others. The reservation system OpenTable reported that by then restaurant bookings were down 42% from a year earlier.

There are people who would be happy to eat out or sit at a bar during a pandemic. But unlike going to the grocery or pharmacy to get essential supplies, it’s not something everyone has to do. If you’re tired of cooking, you can get takeout from your favorite place and enjoy an excellent chef-prepared meal without inhaling other people’s droplets. In some places, you can even get cocktails to go.

The experience we so fondly remember is not what we can expect in the foreseeable future. Half the appeal of sitting down in a bistro or tavern is enjoying the noise of social engagement, the distraction from worries and the warmth of a convivial crowd. But widely spaced tables and bar stools, masked servers and the lurking threat of contagion will dampen the atmosphere.

Premium coffee shops face a similar problem. One of the attractions of Starbucks is being amid strangers in a cozy refuge that allows both privacy and proximity. “Surround coffee with an experience and you can charge $5 a cup,” Joe Pine, co-author of “The Experience Economy,” told The New York Times.

But will people be so eager to spend money to be around others who may be shedding the virus? Is the escape likely to be more calming or nerve-wracking? The new conditions may be tolerable, but people generally don’t go out in hopes of having a tolerable time.

People who really want to go back to their familiar haunts, like those patrons in Wisconsin, can probably put the risk out of their minds, with the aid of alcohol. But not most of us. A Morning Consult poll this month found that only 18% of adults would feel comfortable eating in a restaurant. Compare that with 2017, when 61% dined out at least once a week.

Outdoor seating, which appears to be less risky, is one alternative, as reflected in Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s plan to allow it to resume May 29. (Mayor Lori Lightfoot says Chicago will have to wait until sometime in June.) But alfresco dining is always at the mercy of the weather, and it’s not an enticing option in much of the country for several months of the year. A lot of establishments lack the space for it.

Even customers who would disregard the risks of dining inside may not want to spend the money. A surge of unemployment and a dismal economic outlook are good reasons to cut back on luxuries. If you lose your job, you don’t have much discretionary income. If you fear losing your job, you’ll want to conserve your money.

Between April 1, 2008, and March 31, 2009, during the Great Recession, about 4,000 U.S. restaurants went out of business. The downturn forced Starbucks to close more than 600 outlets. All that destruction occurred without the threat of a dangerous virus.

In the months ahead, there will be restaurants and bars that survive and flourish like oases in the desert. But surrounding them will be a lot of sand.

ronnie_suburban wrote:Some friends were in Cleveland -- where restaurants have re-opened -- over the weekend and reported that it was kind of eerie (as opposed to Erie). Places were as full as they could be with seating capacities reduced, while others waited outside eateries for tables.

They thought the use of standard, reusable menus by the restaurant was a careless oversight and they were uncomfortable with it. Rather than single-use, disposable menus, the restaurant was using standard, multi-use printed menus and did not appear to be cleaning or sanitizing them between uses. As the menus were taken away, bread, intended to be torn by hand, was brought to the table. My friends said they passed on the bread, not wanting to go at it directly after having handled the menus, though they must done something to disinfect their hands before eating their actual meal.

Seems to me there are a lot of points at which the protocols could break down, leaving diners and employees vulnerable to infection. But I'm more than happy to have other states guinea-pigging it for the rest of us.

=R=

MarlaCollins'Husband wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:Some friends were in Cleveland -- where restaurants have re-opened -- over the weekend and reported that it was kind of eerie (as opposed to Erie). Places were as full as they could be with seating capacities reduced, while others waited outside eateries for tables.

They thought the use of standard, reusable menus by the restaurant was a careless oversight and they were uncomfortable with it. Rather than single-use, disposable menus, the restaurant was using standard, multi-use printed menus and did not appear to be cleaning or sanitizing them between uses. As the menus were taken away, bread, intended to be torn by hand, was brought to the table. My friends said they passed on the bread, not wanting to go at it directly after having handled the menus, though they must done something to disinfect their hands before eating their actual meal.

Seems to me there are a lot of points at which the protocols could break down, leaving diners and employees vulnerable to infection. But I'm more than happy to have other states guinea-pigging it for the rest of us.

=R=

So these people were willing to travel to Cleveland, go out in public, pass by people they don't know, touch restaurant door handles, sit in an enclosed space with people they don't know (albeit presumably six feet apart), touch chairs and tables and tablecloths, eat food prepared by people they can't see and know nothing about, and eat food served by people they know nothing about, but draw the line at the possibility that another diner's virus got on the menu they touched and that they could get the virus by touching bread they would then eat?

Times are different and scary, but that's an incredibly curious line to draw, especially when there's no known cases of transmission through eating and there is skepticism that it's possible.

NFriday wrote:They are not going to allow more than 6 people seated at a table, and the servers will have to wear masks, and they are not allowed to give refills on beverages. I can understand coffee, but I wonder if that includes water too?

bweiny wrote:

NFriday wrote:They are not going to allow more than 6 people seated at a table, and the servers will have to wear masks, and they are not allowed to give refills on beverages. I can understand coffee, but I wonder if that includes water too?

The refill restriction doesn't make any sense to me. What the hell is the difference btwn a refill and them bringing you another of the same drink. Coffee and water are the only thing I can think of this applying to, since soft drink refills are already done in the form of bringing a newly filled glass. What is the difference between pouring more water in the same glass and pouring water into a new glass? This is more about creating the illusion of a new profound sanitization, rather than actually doing so.

ronnie_suburban wrote:

bweiny wrote:What the hell is the difference btwn a refill and them bringing you another of the same drink. Coffee and water are the only thing I can think of this applying to, since soft drink refills are already done in the form of bringing a newly filled glass. What is the difference between pouring more water in the same glass and pouring water into a new glass?

Even pre-pandemic I've regularly noticed -- and been grossed out by -- incompetent and careless servers who manage to dip the lip of pitcher, carafe or othe serving vessel into a customer's glass, mug or cup. Given this, it's quite easy to see why 'no refills' makes sense.

bweiny wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:

bweiny wrote:What the hell is the difference btwn a refill and them bringing you another of the same drink. Coffee and water are the only thing I can think of this applying to, since soft drink refills are already done in the form of bringing a newly filled glass. What is the difference between pouring more water in the same glass and pouring water into a new glass?

Even pre-pandemic I've regularly noticed -- and been grossed out by -- incompetent and careless servers who manage to dip the lip of pitcher, carafe or othe serving vessel into a customer's glass, mug or cup. Given this, it's quite easy to see why 'no refills' makes sense.

What is transmitted on the lip of a pitcher, carafe or other serving vessel? Are people drinking the virus in their water or coffee? Those same servers are will be more likely to do the same thing if it's not in front of the patrons. There's no change in the substance of what they're doing - pouring a liquid into a cup or glass. That's why I see it as more performance than substance.

ronnie_suburban wrote:

bweiny wrote:What is transmitted on the lip of a pitcher, carafe or other serving vessel? Are people drinking the virus in their water or coffee? Those same servers are will be more likely to do the same thing if it's not in front of the patrons. There's no change in the substance of what they're doing - pouring a liquid into a cup or glass. That's why I see it as more performance than substance.

Saliva is on the customers' glasses and in the customers' beverages. The pitcher touches the inside of a glass. Now, that saliva is on the pitcher, ready for distribution to everyone else in the restaurant whose glass is filled from it. You're right that this could also happen out of view but you're not making a solid argument that restaurants should be re-opening anytime soon.

bweiny wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:

bweiny wrote:What is transmitted on the lip of a pitcher, carafe or other serving vessel? Are people drinking the virus in their water or coffee? Those same servers are will be more likely to do the same thing if it's not in front of the patrons. There's no change in the substance of what they're doing - pouring a liquid into a cup or glass. That's why I see it as more performance than substance.

Saliva is on the customers' glasses and in the customers' beverages. The pitcher touches the inside of a glass. Now, that saliva is on the pitcher, ready for distribution to everyone else in the restaurant whose glass is filled from it. You're right that this could also happen out of view but you're not making a solid argument that restaurants should be re-opening anytime soon.

I'm not trying to make an argument about whether there should be mass reopenings of restaurants. Just that putting out blanket rules, without a specific guidance and intensive enforcement, which are nearly impossible, is mainly about optics. Your point about serving vessel picking up some amount saliva is appreciated. I just think that emphasizing this unlikely potential transmission is selective when others just as likely aren't addressed. I'm not advocating reopening at all. Moreso that people who are truly worried about dining out, not interpret these type of rules as more curative than they actually are.

Hombre de Acero wrote:Yesterday- I saw The Future of Post Covid 19 eateries.

The painful arithmetic of making up lost revenue for Chicago-area restaurants will not abate in June — even if reopening plans move forward in the coming month — but some makeshift solutions are drawing ire from already shrunken customer bases.

Lettuce Entertain You, the city’s largest restaurant group with 85 restaurants across Chicagoland, recently added a 4% surcharge to delivery and carryout orders.

ronnie_suburban wrote:Even pre-pandemic I've regularly noticed -- and been grossed out by -- incompetent and careless servers who manage to dip the lip of pitcher, carafe or othe serving vessel into a customer's glass, mug or cup. Given this, it's quite easy to see why 'no refills' makes sense.

Dave148 wrote:

The painful arithmetic of making up lost revenue for Chicago-area restaurants will not abate in June — even if reopening plans move forward in the coming month — but some makeshift solutions are drawing ire from already shrunken customer bases.

Lettuce Entertain You, the city’s largest restaurant group with 85 restaurants across Chicagoland, recently added a 4% surcharge to delivery and carryout orders.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavi ... story.html

nsxtasy wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:Even pre-pandemic I've regularly noticed -- and been grossed out by -- incompetent and careless servers who manage to dip the lip of pitcher, carafe or othe serving vessel into a customer's glass, mug or cup. Given this, it's quite easy to see why 'no refills' makes sense.

You wouldn't have seen this at the LTH North lunch at Bluegrass in Highland Park, right before everything shut down. The server was pouring every water glass from a height of at least two feet, without ever spilling a drop.

in his newsletter, Tunde Wey wrote:The loose set of collective demands from restaurants, were twofold. For their employees, they asked the government to stabilize incomes by offering paid sick leave and expanding unemployment benefits. For themselves they sought cost abatement and capital injection through rent relief, low to zero percent interest loans, debt forgiveness, and tax suspensions and holidays.

On March 27, 2020, the government speedily obliged when the President signed a $2T relief package. It goes a long way to meet the demands, but falls short of industry specific relief that would recapitalize restaurants. Without additional intervention it seems many restaurants will die. But what exactly will die?

An industry where labor is segregated by race and gender, underpaid and uninsured. An industry where labor is segregated by race and gender, underpaid and uninsured. An industry fed largely by an industrial agricultural system that either extracts profits from the environment with little consequences, or offers ethically sourced produce to just a few for a lot. Let it die. An industry where on the higher end is great food at fat prices in spaces that drive up real estate values, pushing property prices higher and poorer people further. And on the lower scale, working poor people, making barely enough to keep them going, serve low nutrition meals to other working poor people, who can’t afford quality housing because of predatory development. Let it die. And all over the spectrum, a white man gets paid off of all of that. Let it die.

But what will also die are independent restaurants, “the backbone of our communities… [employing] over 13 million people across the country, [contributing] $1 trillion to our economy and [representing] 4 percent of our GDP.” Let it die.

This old god prioritizes the capital of a few people over the labor and lives of many. This is the same god we’re praying to, to help us through when we ask for relief. Relief keeps the status quo intact by taxing workers to subsidize owners.

Here’s how:

Stimulus checks and unemployment benefits offered to workers will be used to finance consumption (rent, food, healthcare, etc), which only concentrates wealth with the owners of these services. Similarly government guaranteed loans or grants to business owners are essentially the government financing the capital expenditure of businesses. Capital expenditure is money spent by owners to acquire or maintain assets. Assets generate returns. What is wealth if not this: the sedimented, accrual of returns, pressed down shaken together and running over?

Americans famously say ‘there’s no such thing as a free lunch’ yet they don’t always abide this axiom. This very American stimulus package is an ‘eat now, pay later,’ relief for restaurant workers— and it barely sates workers’ hunger but sets a relative feast for ownership. Deficit spending, which this relief bill is, is financed by future tax increases, or service cuts or future borrowing or future inflation, which means future interest rate hikes and increased borrowing costs for workers (and owners). But while the payback will be shared, the payoff isn’t.

in his newsletter, Tunde Wey wrote:All these broad measures will fit neatly into the Green New Deal, a legislative proposal that tackles climate crises and economic equality. Whether all of this is the exact answer is irrelevant. This historic moment calls for a complete retooling of our economic system not a cheap resurrection of the old master. It calls us to leave this long decayed but now dying industry (and economic system) unrisen.

Let it die so people may live... and if workers or owners love the work so much they’ll come back.

Barrio, a restaurant in River North, had planned to open its outside patio Wednesday, as the city entered phase three of its gradual reopening plan, and had companywide trainings set for Monday and Tuesday to acclimate staff to the new procedures to stay safe amid the pandemic, said executive chef Andrew Sikkelerus. But that is likely to be pushed back after Saturday night’s unrest, which left its windows smashed, he said. The restaurant had been open for carryout that night but shut its doors as a mob of people swarmed Kinzie Street, and employees had to sneak out when there were gaps in the crowd, he said.