The Latin phrase 'Caveat emptor' refers to the principle that 'the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made'.Wonder if this responsibility extends to billing too. Do read on to find out why.
I am at best what can be called a social drinker. It means that at a gathering where liquor is served, I would decide whether or not I have a beer or a glass of wine to 'give company'. I don't have objections - religious or otherwise - to others drinking, as long as they can keep control of their tongue and feet, but I will neither spend my money on booze and nor will I have it at home. In fact, I haven't really had any alcohol for quite a few years and don't really feel the need to drink nowadays - maybe I get a high as it is by seeing what goes around me!
In my first career in sales, where socialising at the end of the day usually with lubrication is quite common, it took some time for my colleagues to wrap their minds around my quirks, but then in one such dinner at a five star hotel, one of my bosses gave me an useful task to do. Being a veteran, he told us that most places where liquor is served have this delightful habit of inflating the bill. Since he expected me to drink much less than others at the table, he quietly asked me to keep informal tabs on how much was actually consumed. Since this was about the first time I had been to a hostelry of this class, I was sceptical, but the old fox of a Sales Manager was bang on. When the bill came, I found huge discrepancies in not only the quantity of liquor ordered but even in the number and value of food items served. A bit hesitant to confront the hotel, I quietly told the boss man. With his help, I told the steward that the bill was wrong, pointing out where it was wrong too. I was astonished that not only did the hotel accept it without demur but that we also got a corrected bill pretty quickly which reflected what was actually eaten and drunk. The difference if I remember right was about thirty percent.
I was still willing to think that this was an aberration till many such examples later showed me that this was virtually the norm. Almost universally, establishments serving liquor and food together seemed to be quietly inflating their bills - across the board, in locations all around the country and across all categories of such restaurants. This feeling of mine, based largely on experience, got reinforced by another incident. In my second career as an academic, we once did the legwork for a research project for a tourism industry body. This helped me to rub shoulders with many senior executives from many companies in this area in that city, including some in the hospitality sector. In a one-to-one with one such worthy, one day, I quietly asked him about this. His reaction was noteworthy. With a totally unabashed smirk, he told me "We also have to live, boss!"
What I have put down is purely anecdotal and may not stand up to the rigours of academic research, but I will go by what Mr Big, a gangster in one of the James Bond series written by the inimitable Ian Fleming says: "once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, third time is enemy action".
I started with caveat emptor, buyers beware - now you know why ....
I am at best what can be called a social drinker. It means that at a gathering where liquor is served, I would decide whether or not I have a beer or a glass of wine to 'give company'. I don't have objections - religious or otherwise - to others drinking, as long as they can keep control of their tongue and feet, but I will neither spend my money on booze and nor will I have it at home. In fact, I haven't really had any alcohol for quite a few years and don't really feel the need to drink nowadays - maybe I get a high as it is by seeing what goes around me!
In my first career in sales, where socialising at the end of the day usually with lubrication is quite common, it took some time for my colleagues to wrap their minds around my quirks, but then in one such dinner at a five star hotel, one of my bosses gave me an useful task to do. Being a veteran, he told us that most places where liquor is served have this delightful habit of inflating the bill. Since he expected me to drink much less than others at the table, he quietly asked me to keep informal tabs on how much was actually consumed. Since this was about the first time I had been to a hostelry of this class, I was sceptical, but the old fox of a Sales Manager was bang on. When the bill came, I found huge discrepancies in not only the quantity of liquor ordered but even in the number and value of food items served. A bit hesitant to confront the hotel, I quietly told the boss man. With his help, I told the steward that the bill was wrong, pointing out where it was wrong too. I was astonished that not only did the hotel accept it without demur but that we also got a corrected bill pretty quickly which reflected what was actually eaten and drunk. The difference if I remember right was about thirty percent.
I was still willing to think that this was an aberration till many such examples later showed me that this was virtually the norm. Almost universally, establishments serving liquor and food together seemed to be quietly inflating their bills - across the board, in locations all around the country and across all categories of such restaurants. This feeling of mine, based largely on experience, got reinforced by another incident. In my second career as an academic, we once did the legwork for a research project for a tourism industry body. This helped me to rub shoulders with many senior executives from many companies in this area in that city, including some in the hospitality sector. In a one-to-one with one such worthy, one day, I quietly asked him about this. His reaction was noteworthy. With a totally unabashed smirk, he told me "We also have to live, boss!"
What I have put down is purely anecdotal and may not stand up to the rigours of academic research, but I will go by what Mr Big, a gangster in one of the James Bond series written by the inimitable Ian Fleming says: "once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, third time is enemy action".
I started with caveat emptor, buyers beware - now you know why ....
8888
No comments:
Post a Comment