Letters

Would you endorse any old foods?

I feel that over the past five years great strides have been made to equip chefs with produce that enables them to reach higher standards in their cooking.

However, I am horrified to see certain celebrity chefs advertising ready-prepared products of poor quality. I would ask any such chefs that before agreeing to advertise these products they would ask themselves the following questions:

1. Would they consider putting these products in their own restaurants?

2. Would they consider eating such products ?

3. What message does this send to young chefs coming into the industry?

4. Have they forgotten the standards that made them successful in the first place?

RUSSELL ALLEN

Aubrey Allen Butchers,

Canley, Coventry.

Thanks to Rory Kennedy

The death of Rory Kennedy was an enormous loss, both personally and to the industry.

Rory was my chef de partie at the Connaught from 1984-85. I was a keen, green, ambitious but ordinary chef, and Rory Kennedy put backbone, discipline and awareness into my character. I shall be ever grateful for his lessons and teaching.

Thank you Rory.

PAUL HEATHCOTE

Chef-proprietor,

Longridge, Preston, Lancashire.

Fallout from Granada's action

I read with sadness about Granada's discharged general managers (Caterer's various articles and Letters, 15 May).

Granada is the unassailed brand leader in the UK following its acquisition of Forte. This position carries a responsibility that perhaps Granada should be reminded about.

Not only does the company have responsibility to its shareholders, customers, directors and employers, it also carries an industry responsibility. It should be the trail-blazer, the innovator, lobbyist and standard-bearer.

With an already acute personnel shortfall in the leisure business, the signals sent out by this action to those contemplating this industry with a view to a career cannot be anything other than very damaging.

I feel sure Gerry Robinson would agree.

JOHN PATTIN

Proprietor,

The Cottage in the Wood,

Malvern Wells, Worcester.

Nil subsidy is not a holy grail

I hope (and believe) you are wrong when you refer to nil-subsidy contracts as being the "Holy Grail" of contract caterers (Food Service Management, May 1997).

I would agree that caterers need to take a more commercial approach to in-house catering, but this rarely means that they should also operate the catering on a nil-subsidy basis. The true objectives of taking such an approach are twofold: first, to ensure that employers perceive the catering as being a genuine, good-value alternative to the catering available in the high street; and second, to ensure that the client's investment in catering offers the maximum possible value for money.

On some occasions this will mean that the catering operates without a subsidy. However, in far more cases it simply means that the catering subsidy is reduced and, more importantly, more people perceive the catering as a valuable benefit.

I believe our industry should be advising clients more carefully with regard to nil subsidy. Surely when looking to eliminate their subsidy, clients should be asking themselves why they offer catering to staff at all?

Getting clients to concentrate on this will often lead to a realisation that it is worth subsidising the catering to ensure that the service is genuinely valued by their staff.

Nil subsidy catering could be seen as providing very poor value if the staff no longer see it as a genuine benefit.

In the late 1990s perhaps we would all do well to remember that value for money does not usually mean low cost. It is about a realistic balance between cost and quality and, most importantly, about satisfying the customers.

CHRIS STERN

Principal Consultant,

Stern Consultancy Group,

Horsham, West Sussex.

Allergies must be recognised

Terence McGeary's article of food allergies (Need to Know, 17 April) raises an important issue.

The advice he gives to people who have an allergy to a particular food is to avoid it. This is easy with some foods mentioned, but much more difficult with foods such as sesame seeds, peanuts and nuts.

Experience has taught me that many restaurateurs do not appreciate the difference between moderate food allergies and anaphylaxis, which is life-threatening. If restaurateurs agree to cater for people with life-threatening allergies then it is vital that they do their homework.

Allergen avoidance is not as simple as checking labels of ingredients or sauces. Potent allergens such as sesame seeds, peanuts and nuts, may be present in pre-prepared foods (such as curry sauce) and pre-packaged foods without any clear declaration. There is currently no law against it. The more detailed labelling promised has not yet been introduced.

Meanwhile, chefs can only provide accurate information on dishes prepared in-house. So what about the soup of the day? Did the chef make it from scratch, or did he use a bought-in base?

Cross-contamination is also an important issue. To identify and minimise the risk of cross-contamination, every part of the food preparation area needs to be analysed, and this requires education.

The reuse of cooking oils in the catering sector is widespread. To minimise the risk to people with life-threatening allergies, caterers need to be aware that potent allergens may be present in any oils due to this practice.

Sesame oil is used unrefined, and it retains a concentration of allergenic protein and is hazardous to sesame-allergic individuals. A trace amount of sesame oil in a wok is enough to trigger off an anaphylactic shock.

There is also the question of compensation. If accurate lists of dishes containing nuts or sesame are provided and an allergic customer orders from the "all clear" items on the menu, who is responsible if the individual suffers a fatal anaphylaxis attack from a contaminated all-clear item?

The Canadian Restaurant Food Services Association has introduced an Allergy Aware scheme. Restaurateurs in the scheme are responsible for providing ingredient information on a specific number of dishes.

Using accurate ingredient information, allergy sufferers take the responsibility of selecting menus based on their known allergies. Enquiries are handled by suitably trained staff. If the Canadians do it, why can't we?

MAGGIE SPIRITO PERKINS

Radlett, Hertfordshire.

Is Conran causing a bottleneck?

With long hours and low wages why should anyone want to be a chef?

Ask most chefs that question and the answer will normally include something about being creative.

In the past few years Sir Terence Conran seems to have conquered the catering world, at least as far as London goes. His objective has been to ensure that diners can expect a better-than-average standard in all of his establishments. This he has achieved by exemplary business management.

Large, well-organised kitchens have allowed him to achieve a better profit ratio for the number of chefs to the number of diners.

Conran chefs can usually expect shorter hours and better rates of pay. In this Utopian world where diners and chefs alike benefit, what on earth could be wrong?

Plenty! Trying to serve an army of diners needs a precise operation. Everyone must know their station and perform their duties in a prescribed time frame.

While it is only hearsay, according to applicants we interview, once you have somebody who has mastered their position they are rarely moved on to other sections. That is why so many chefs come to us looking for a more sympathetic outlet for their talents.

Moving through various sections in their earlier years is how most chefs are able to perfect their range of skills which allows them to move on to more senior positions. If what we hear about Conran's organisation is true, they do not need to corner so many professional chefs to realise their objectives.

Perhaps a solution would be to train more line chefs, releasing those with creative ability back into the market-place, thus protecting and improving the industry for future generations of chefs.

Unless this problem is addressed, boredom at being treated like somebody on a production line instead of a creative chef will lead to stagnation and a drop in standards. With Conran paying above-average wages, chefs will be reluctant to move on, so there is a potential crisis in a few years' time for both Conran and the catering industry at large.

We at Magnus McFee hold Conran in high regard but do feel concerned that irreparable damage may be being done to our industry unless this situation is addressed in the near future.

JOHN BAKER and CHARLES McNICOLL

Directors,

Magnus McFee Recruitment Consultants,

London WC2.