Restaurant Inspections
Mar 13, 2015, 12:16 pm
#31
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 11,969
Generally, I would agree with uk1 that more information is a good thing. However, I'm with emma69 in that I've lived my life trusting that, if a restaurant is permitted to remain open, then I should be ok. Touch wood, and hoping not to tempt fate (I'm not eating at a restaurant for the next week....), I have not had food poisoning yet, except on United Airlines.
As I see it, the problem with bureaucratic systems is that they are very much a "one size fits all" approach and they look at lots of things which are not strictly necessary. Assuming that they will (and they should) close down a restaurant that was dangerous, then one must assume that you are safe in a restaurant with a score of 1 as much as with a score of 5.
As I see it, the problem with bureaucratic systems is that they are very much a "one size fits all" approach and they look at lots of things which are not strictly necessary. Assuming that they will (and they should) close down a restaurant that was dangerous, then one must assume that you are safe in a restaurant with a score of 1 as much as with a score of 5.
Your trust in fate philosophy might be a slightly more understandable approach if places were inspected frequently and a bad place was picked up and closed down quickly. But the fact that they are not doesn't make your approach a sensible approach. In most places it is infrequent. So your optimism in inspections doesn't take account of the extended periods before and in between an inspection. At least inspections tell,you what they were like last time they were inspected and after a few years in an area a pattern emerges. It tells you as much about which owners and operators are not just OK when inspected but also which ones you can trust over time. Many with poor ratings also always seem to be changing hands often.
You also take a rather fanciful view of how this is done. As I posted above a 0 and 1 rating is urgent action necessary. If you are happy eating in that place in preference to a clean place - and that clearly sounds rational to you, but may not be to many other sensible people.
Most places with a 4 are desperate for a 5, and those with a 5 do not want the shame of losing it. It is a matter of pride and reputation. I've seen many Asian places where our second home is that have never risen above base levels and people talk about them and avoid them for those that proudly display their 5 ratings. The apps also now tell you rated places that are close to you.
Mar 13, 2015, 10:03 pm
#32
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Northern California
Programs: UA Premier Gold, 1.5 Million Mile Flyer
Posts: 3,547
We're all different.
Your trust in fate philosophy might be a slightly more understandable approach if places were inspected frequently and a bad place was picked up and closed down quickly. But the fact that they are not doesn't make your approach a sensible approach. In most places it is infrequent. So your optimism in inspections doesn't take account of the extended periods before and in between an inspection. At least inspections tell,you what they were like last time they were inspected and after a few years in an area a pattern emerges. It tells you as much about which owners and operators are not just OK when inspected but also which ones you can trust over time. Many with poor ratings also always seem to be changing hands often.
You also take a rather fanciful view of how this is done. As I posted above a 0 and 1 rating is urgent action necessary. If you are happy eating in that place in preference to a clean place - and that clearly sounds rational to you, but may not be to many other sensible people.
Most places with a 4 are desperate for a 5, and those with a 5 do not want the shame of losing it. It is a matter of pride and reputation. I've seen many Asian places where our second home is that have never risen above base levels and people talk about them and avoid them for those that proudly display their 5 ratings. The apps also now tell you rated places that are close to you.
Your trust in fate philosophy might be a slightly more understandable approach if places were inspected frequently and a bad place was picked up and closed down quickly. But the fact that they are not doesn't make your approach a sensible approach. In most places it is infrequent. So your optimism in inspections doesn't take account of the extended periods before and in between an inspection. At least inspections tell,you what they were like last time they were inspected and after a few years in an area a pattern emerges. It tells you as much about which owners and operators are not just OK when inspected but also which ones you can trust over time. Many with poor ratings also always seem to be changing hands often.
You also take a rather fanciful view of how this is done. As I posted above a 0 and 1 rating is urgent action necessary. If you are happy eating in that place in preference to a clean place - and that clearly sounds rational to you, but may not be to many other sensible people.
Most places with a 4 are desperate for a 5, and those with a 5 do not want the shame of losing it. It is a matter of pride and reputation. I've seen many Asian places where our second home is that have never risen above base levels and people talk about them and avoid them for those that proudly display their 5 ratings. The apps also now tell you rated places that are close to you.
Last edited by braslvr; Mar 13, 2015 at 10:09 pm
Mar 14, 2015, 1:39 am
#33
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 11,969
I can see both sides of this, and I pretty much agree with Emma, but it doesn't seem to me as though you're factoring in the taste of the food in a given restaurant. If the food simply tastes much better at the C or D joint next door to the A joint, I'm going for taste. Only if they were equal would I consider the grade.
I'm not going to clean places that serve crap food. I'm going to places that serve food I enjoy that are clean.
Mar 14, 2015, 6:59 pm
#34
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Northern California
Programs: UA Premier Gold, 1.5 Million Mile Flyer
Posts: 3,547
OK, but many MANY areas outside of large cities don't have enough choices for us to be able to consistently have both. Anyway, I'm not arguing with you. It really is a "to each his own" subject.
May 18, 2015, 7:26 pm
#35
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 130
In 40 years in the business, I saw every kind on inspector there was. Some were blessed with common sense, some were not. Our county health department often held luncheon meetings at our restaurant. You can't get a better endorsement than that.
May 19, 2015, 8:55 am
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,631
May 19, 2015, 9:01 am
#37
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,224
Just be grateful that there are inspectors for restaurants:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...lesh-to-diners
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...lesh-to-diners
May 19, 2015, 12:56 pm
#38
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Central Texas
Programs: Many, slipping beneath the horizon
Posts: 9,859
Just be grateful that there are inspectors for restaurants:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...lesh-to-diners
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...lesh-to-diners