>
>> i mean, how do they account for, say, increased spending on
>> products/traffic which makes the staff you're operating with appear more
>> efficient. e.g., you have one waitress taking care of the floor during
>> slow season. same waitress on floor as it picks up but isn't quite busy
>> season. waitress is working hard, making the bucks, is tired but the
>> wad of bills in her pocket is the reward. (productivity numbers are
>> going to look good at that interim point). when it gets busier you add
>> one or two more servers, a fourth part time for the rush
>> hours. productivity goes down.
>
>Right. What you describe is what drove those productivity figs to such
>high numbers - the tired, overbusy waitress part of the cycle.
>
>Doug
>
except, of course, the nice thing about waitressing is that you have a stake in your productivity: tips! i remember wanting to make a lot of money and being perfectly happy to take on as many tables as i could get my hands on. which makes the cooks hate you because they get paid the same no matter how many plates of food they pump out! waitressing is an anomaly in that regard.
kelley, just renegotiated from hourly to salary with *very* mixed feelings. was told by da boss that my article proposal would make a good book and why don't i write a proposal, submit, and i can make lotsa money. the kicker was this (direct quote): " You are young, there are 168 hours in a week and sleep is unnecessary until you hit 40." ok, well maybe we'll IPO in a couple.