I agree, it is hardly worth applauding such working and pay conditions for apprentices. But....the industry rewards true experience and skills. My own take, is my own father who was paid somewhat well in the 1970's as a pastry chef for a 3-star Michelin starred place. There he would work alongside with two 'foreign' apprentices - Masao from Japan and John from New York, USA - both of them learned, sweated, and slaved for next to no pay... But... Each walked away and returned home with a glossy Paris reference. Masao went on to become head chef at one of Tokyo's most prestigious French restaurants at the time, as in instantly hired and paid rather handsomely from thereon. John went back to his beloved NYC and opened a lovely little bistro... Pain now, pleasure later..
The only way a chef will ever make great money is if he becomes an execitive head chef or owns own restaurant or bistro only a few make it and many like myself spent years working for terrible money and bad conditions hoping to make it to top after 15 years trying i now work as a taxi driver and make far more money and have less stress and mentally and physically better
@CooManTunes well I have a career but maybe not 1 I have a passion for and put so much blood sweat and tears in too for me my chefing days now.seem a waste .
In November 2016, the Guardian reported that whilst Roux's restaurant made over £250,000 in profit in 2015, he was paying some of his chefs less than the minimum wage. A chef showed the Guardian journalist Robert Booth evidence that chefs typically put in over 65 hours of labour per week, only earning about £5.50 per hour. Work days began at 7am ending at 11.30pm, with only one hour break between lunch and dinner times and sometimes as little as fifteen minutes for meal times.
If the employees didn't like working there, then they would've quit. They don't quit because they love the experience. They also know that crybabies get nowhere. You worthless loser.
Being an untrained chef, the individual in question agreed to be taken on as an apprentice on an apprentice's pay. In UK law, apprentices have to be between 16 and 24, but this individual was slightly older, ISTR 26. Being over age for apprentices' wages was the problem. He was paid all outstanding wages, and the restaurant invited any other staff to come forward who felt they had been underpaid, but none did. The result is that untrained chefs, who are still learning and not making money for the business, using such top tier restaurants for their education and an impressive CV entry, are much less likely to be taken on if they're over 24. It's not dissimilar to getting an internship at NASA or Goldman Sachs. You get valuable training through work shadowing and an impressive line on your CV. I'm not saying that the underpayment was right bearing in mind the employment law legal breach, but there's a misapprehension that somehow the individual in question was somehow an asset to the business and was being used, when in fact the business was training the individual for their future career.
