Re: Cancelled Xmas Work Do - Venue being unreasonable
I also used to work in the hospitality industry, was a fellow member of the British Institute of Innkeeping (until I made the decision I was getting too old to be working 100 hour weeks!) and managed a pub with a t/o in excess of 3million a year. So I know the truth in the whole supply chain argument and it just isn't valid in this case.
The venue would not have placed an order with the brewery at this stage for beer/spirits etc. Most cellars simply aren't big enough to hold stock for weeks on end (and if they can then they can't be that busy).
The breweries deliver once/twice a week, and (for a cost) can make 'special deliveries' providing the order is a sufficient size. On the odd opportunities I got caught out I could make a trip to the local brewery and buy barrels direct (as can any licensee).
As far as other catering goes (food), I doubt the venue is paying any penalties to a supplier at this early stage. Even if they were this would be the ONLY valid loss I should think the venue could demonstrate.
Regards hiring extra staff. This would have been achieved by getting agency staff in. No venue would hire temp staff through an agency 3 months in advance. This would be something that would be done anything between 2-4 weeks before the event.
As for 40% based on drinks consumed the year before?!
It may be standard practice at some venues and chains. It was also standard practice for banks to apply charges, mis-sell PPI, breach lending regulations, fix the LIBOR rate etc.
Unfortunately just because its standard practice, does not make it good practice, or even legal. I think there is room here at the very least for negotiation with the venue. Especially if they have ANY concern about reputation or repeat business (would you book this venue again after being treated so shoddily?)
And many people don't. I was never short of people ringing up trying to organize last minute Christmas Parties. The venue manager, (if they are any good), should have taken details of any potential customer and could be ringing round seeing if they are still looking for a venue.
This is the only potential sticking point. However, this still doesn't prevent a consumer being protected by their statutory and legal rights.
Its more than wrong, its absolutely outrageous and is taking the warm smelly stuff! This on its own would be enough for me to never use this venue again.
Right - but they would have to prove an actual loss of earnings from the cancellation. What would happen, if, after the cancellation, their takings on the day of the booking are actually more than would be expected that time of year? Could there be a counterclaim against the venue that the cancellation actually was to their net benefit?
If, and I mean if, the venue are now willing to be reasonable on this then this is definately a way forward. If the company are trying to save money, then paying anything for nothing seems a little counter intuitive. Thats if everyone at the company is willing to pay the remainder 60%.
If there is no uplift or deposit required for the bar, I would be tempted to encourage staff to just use the venue for the meal, and then go somewhere else for drinks.
This is an interesting debate!!!!
Personally, I think if the venue manager has any concern at all about their reputation and future business, they should be taking a different approach here and looking at some sort of compromise that encourages future business.
If the company concerned has used the venue for many years I would be pointing this out, and the fact that they will not be using it again, and will also be telling other business owners in the area about their bad experience, ESPECIALLY over the 40% charge on drinks thing. Everyone in the hospitality industry is aware of the 10/1 rule on complaints!
Best
SnV
I also used to work in the hospitality industry, was a fellow member of the British Institute of Innkeeping (until I made the decision I was getting too old to be working 100 hour weeks!) and managed a pub with a t/o in excess of 3million a year. So I know the truth in the whole supply chain argument and it just isn't valid in this case.
The venue would not have placed an order with the brewery at this stage for beer/spirits etc. Most cellars simply aren't big enough to hold stock for weeks on end (and if they can then they can't be that busy).
The breweries deliver once/twice a week, and (for a cost) can make 'special deliveries' providing the order is a sufficient size. On the odd opportunities I got caught out I could make a trip to the local brewery and buy barrels direct (as can any licensee).
As far as other catering goes (food), I doubt the venue is paying any penalties to a supplier at this early stage. Even if they were this would be the ONLY valid loss I should think the venue could demonstrate.
Regards hiring extra staff. This would have been achieved by getting agency staff in. No venue would hire temp staff through an agency 3 months in advance. This would be something that would be done anything between 2-4 weeks before the event.
As for 40% based on drinks consumed the year before?!
Originally posted by jen_br
View Post
Unfortunately just because its standard practice, does not make it good practice, or even legal. I think there is room here at the very least for negotiation with the venue. Especially if they have ANY concern about reputation or repeat business (would you book this venue again after being treated so shoddily?)
Originally posted by jen_br
View Post
Originally posted by jen_br
View Post
Originally posted by jen_br
View Post
Originally posted by jen_br
View Post
Originally posted by Never-In-Doubt
View Post
If there is no uplift or deposit required for the bar, I would be tempted to encourage staff to just use the venue for the meal, and then go somewhere else for drinks.
This is an interesting debate!!!!
Personally, I think if the venue manager has any concern at all about their reputation and future business, they should be taking a different approach here and looking at some sort of compromise that encourages future business.
If the company concerned has used the venue for many years I would be pointing this out, and the fact that they will not be using it again, and will also be telling other business owners in the area about their bad experience, ESPECIALLY over the 40% charge on drinks thing. Everyone in the hospitality industry is aware of the 10/1 rule on complaints!
Best
SnV
Comment