As a life-long non-smoker, I can tell Naomi that I *don't* frequent establishments that allow smoking. If I know a place is non-smoking, it gets my business. Heck, I really enjoy going to Delaware (the state, not the street) and going into a bar/restaurant and plonking down my cash because I *know* that I'm not going to smell like death afterwards.
And the crap about treating your workers better, even though they have to work around second-hand smoke is simply that: crap. If the White Dog was the Progressive Restaurant it thinks it is, it should have banned smoking years ago.
gail
Jonathan Cass wrote:
Hmm -- I don't mean to be harsh Naomi, but that sounds like a big fat justification to me: "Hey, we treat our staff better than most other restaurants so it is okay that we subject them to a known carcinogen."
The White Dog permitting smoking is akin to a pharmacy selling cigarettes.
Jonathan A. Cass
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Naomi
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 10:24 AM
To: Vincent/Roger; [email protected]
Subject: [UC] No Smoking Bill, White Dog & Abbraccio
Vincent is right, we are not 100% non-smoking. But Abbraccio and the White Dog, although we are only 1 mile apart, have very different surroundings as far as competition and customer base.
As we are located in the heart of the campus and surrounded by 3 other bars that all offer smoking all the time at their bars, we agonized over the decision to go smoke-free for years before we finally came to a compromise decision a year ago. This decision came from many discussions with our bar staff, wait staff that works in the main bar and seasonal patio area, and our customers. We decided to ban all smoking except for in our main bar from 10pm - 2am and on the seasonal patio. (We have never allowed smoking in the restaurant or at our piano bar.) Our late night customers threatened to go elsewhere if smoking was banned entirely and our staff (many of whom are non-smokers) were worried that, without customers, their incomes would be drastically reduced. Our late night crowd is mostly graduate students, hospital staff and neighbors - many of whom smoke. With 3 other bars offering smoking on our block, we felt that we couldn't completely go smoke free without seriously hurting business - and our staffs' income. The partial smoke-free decision did hurt financially us, but we felt that the calculated loss was for the best for our employees' health and for the well being of our customers.
Prior to this decision, we extensively looked into ventilation systems that would draft the smoke out of the room more quickly but being in a very old building that has already been retrofitted for kitchen equipment, we didn't have many options. So we use the hood over the grill station to vent it out and have the incoming air positioned to bring in fresh air as quickly as possible. We also, whenever possible, offer additional seating away from the main bar for those that don't want to be near the second-hand smoke.
We really wanted to see this bill go through so that all the bars were on an even playing field - we even sent one of our employees to testify an the council hearings for this bill. It was really difficult for us and for our employees to have to choose between physically healthy and financially healthy decisions. Elizabeth is right, we do have a choice. We could go completely smoke free on principal and hurt the financial balance of the restaurant and hurt our employees financial well-being (which they have told us they can not afford), or we could compromise and allow smoking in 1 of our eight dining rooms for 4 hours a day.
I think making sure the White Dog is here next year and that our employees can support themselves is worth a small compromise. We support 100+ employees with a living wage (starting at a min. $8/hr - instead of minimum wage - $5.??/hr). We offer healthcare and dental insurance, a retirement plan, an emergency sunshine fund, free bank checking plan, help with their taxes, an interest-free computer loan program, reimbursement for smoking cessation programs (their choice), a workplace giving fund and, of course discounted and free food (that's sustainable, local and fresh), drinks and admission to our events - including international travel with our sister restaurant program. Our staff is treated better than most restaurants and we always keep their best interests at heart when making decisions. Keeping the business financially viable is in the best interest of all 100 employees, not just the folks working late night who want the big tipping smokers to sit at our bar.
Anyone who has been in the restaurant business can understand that there is a lot more to running a restaurant than just the food. It's a delicate balance with a small profit margin. This bill would have helped put everyone on the same playing field and we will support it when it is reintroduced.
Naomi
on 3/17/05 10:41 PM, Vincent/Roger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it on.If you have a list of nonsmoking restaurants and bars, passPlease. I need some places to eat.
I'm writing in response to the many postings regarding the non-smoking ban. As someone who this directly affects, I think I have a right to speak about it. Unlike even The White Dog(!), Abbraccio is a totally non-smoking restaurant on the interior, altho we do allow and try to accommodate smokers on the outside porch (we even operate portable outdoor heaters in cool weather.). As a businessman who has invested over a million dollars in trying to better the neighborhood I want to be accommodating to ALL of my potential customers.
We are non-smoking inside because we made the conscious decision to be family-friendly. Yet, I can't afford to alienate all others individuals. Do any of you know that Nutter's bill includes a codicle that there must be no smoking within 16' of the building (thus no smoking on our porch either, if the bill is passed)?
Knowing the importance of all of this I have avidly followed reports that California legislation regarding smoking seems to work because warm weather and the availability of smoking on outdoor terraces, while in New York compliance is only face value. If there can't even be outside smoking, what then will be the compliance and what is the cost of trying to identify compliance with these issues?
I smoked for way too many years and don't anymore, but I don't think we should hatchet people that may need to; where do we look to alternatives and allowances?
The restaurant industry is already saddled with a bogus city drink tax to supposedly supports the school system (if it really was collected properly it would cover 10% of the school costs) and now no-smoking-- make these issues state-wide so at least we have a fair advantage over the restaurants across the city line which also were cheaper built as a result of the unions (but don't get me started on that again!).
Anyway come to Abbraccio: smoke free indoors (except for the wood burning fireplace)- at least for now you can smoke on the porch (which I think allows options) and help build up my bar business (which without smoking is hard to do!) We love this neighborhood and city but sometimes feel that restrictions are hard on business, business that the city should be promoting!
Vincent Whittacre
Abbraccio Restaurant
---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
White Dog Cafe 3420 Sansom St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 http://www.whitedog.com (215) 386-9224 x105
The Black Cat Gift Shop 3426 Sansom St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 http://www.blackcatshop.com
---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
